Affirmative

Definitions:
 Jury Nullification- “A sanctioned doctrine of trial proceedings where in
members of a jury disregard either the evidence presented or the instructions
of the judge in order to reach a verdict based on their own consciences.”
(Farlex Dictionary)
 Perceived- “Interpret or look on someone or something in a particular
way”. (Meriam Webster)
 Injustice- “Violation of the right or of the rights of another” (Meriam
Webster)
 Civil Disobedience- “refusal to obey governmental demands or
commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of
forcing concessions from the government”

“It is not only [the juror's] right, but his duty...to find the verdict according to his
own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to
the direction of the court”. It is because I agree with these words by John Adams
that I agree that jury nullification ought to be used it the face of perceived injustice
in the United States Justice System.
Value:
I concur with the value of justice. Justice is defined as “the process or result of
using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals”. Jury nullification is
used to serve justice when the jury must disregard the written law and act on the
juror’s own self conscience. Jury nullification is used to break the confining chains
that the law has placed in order to accomplish justice.

Criterion: The protection of natural rights. The definition of natural rights is

defined by Meriam-Webster Dictionary as the rights that people have under natural
law. Natural law is given to us by the Declaration of Independence of the United
States life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perceived injustice comes about
when natural law comes in conflict with criminal laws. In these cases, the jury has
the responsibility to uphold natural laws, and if jury nullification is the only way to
do that then it ought to be used.
Contention 1: Jury Nullification can be used as protection of natural rights.
Sub-Contention A: An innocent person could be deprived of his/her natural rights
if it was not for jury nullification.
The United States criminal justice system is based around the laws that are
Constitutional. The main purpose of this system is intended to hold and protect
natural law over the common law. In the case of an innocent person their natural
rights must be upheld even if it means disregarding these laws. The natural rights
of men and women must be considered in order to reach a verdict that is just.
Sub-Contention B: Jury nullification will protect the rights of an individual against
unjust laws.
Not all laws reflect natural laws. The Fugitive Slave Act went against the natural
laws of the African American population by denying them the pursuit of happiness.
Thomas Jefferson worked to prevent the Fugitive Slave Act from being enforced in
their states. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison declared that states have the
right to nullify federal laws that they deemed unconstitutional. Natural laws is are
everyone and the man-made laws are less important.
Contention 2: Jury nullification will insure protection against injustice
Sub-Contention A: Jury Nullification can protect against corrupt judges
Judges are seen as the only one who can determine the enforcement of the
law. This is not true. We live in a democracy, the jury must check the judge in
order to prevent too much power in the hands of a single person, and that everyone
has an equal say in the verdict.
Sub-Contention B: Jury nullification can protect against harsh punishment.
Jurors must nullify a punishment that they believe is unjust. Unjust is defined as
“not based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair”. Jury
nullification must be used to achieve a proper punishment that.