Self-study
Under the legal doctrine of jury nullification, a jury may legitimately acquit a defendant it believes violated a law if the jury believes that law to be unjust. ██████████ █████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ███ ████████ ██████ ███████████ ██ ███████ ████████████ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ███████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ███████ █████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author implicitly concludes that proponents of jury nullification are wrong. He supports this by claiming that jury nullification depends too much on jurors’ objectivity and that juries too often make serious mistakes when deciding to acquit based on perceived unfairness.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The author undermines the proponents of jury nullification by pointing out that the doctrine has negative consequences— overreliance on jurors’ objectivity and a tendency for juries to make serious mistakes based on perceived unfairness.
17.
The argument uses which one ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████████████
a
attacking the motives ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ ████████
The author never attacks the motives of the proponents of jury nullification. He just undermines their position by pointing out negative consequences of the doctrine.
b
identifying an inconsistency ██████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████
The author doesn’t point out any inconsistencies in the proponents’ reasoning. He just points out the consequences of their position.
c
attempting to show ████ █ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ █████
The proponents’ premise is that jury nullification is legitimate “because it helps shield against injustice.” The author never argues that this is false, and we can’t presume that his argument implies that it’s false. Instead, he highlights negative consequences of the doctrine.
d
presenting a purported ██████████████ ██ █ ███████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████
The author never presents a counterexample to the proponents’ claim. He just presents consequences of jury nullification.
e
arguing that the ███████████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ███████████ ████████████
The author undermines the proponents’ conclusion by arguing that the application of the doctrine has undesirable consequences— overreliance on jurors’ objectivity and a tendency for juries to make serious mistakes based on perceived unfairness.