Plain-English Summary
This joint resolution proposes an amendment to the Rhode Island Constitution that would explicitly allow criminal defendants to argue for jury nullification during their trials. If passed by the General Assembly, the proposition would be submitted to Rhode Island voters for their approval or rejection at the next statewide general election. The measure seeks to fundamentally alter how criminal defense can be conducted in the state's courtrooms.
Under the proposed amendment, a new section would be added to Article I of the state constitution. This section would grant criminal defendants the absolute right to argue that a jury should consider more than just the factual evidence of the case and the strict letter of the law during its deliberations. Specifically, defendants would be permitted to argue that the law they are accused of violating is morally repugnant, outdated, or unfair to the citizenry. They could also argue that the underlying statute is unconstitutional.
Essentially, this measure would formalize jury nullification as a legitimate and protected defense strategy in Rhode Island. Historically, judges routinely instruct juries that they must apply the law as given to them, regardless of their personal feelings about it. This amendment would override that standard practice by empowering juries to judge the law itself, not just the defendant's actions. If the resolution passes the legislature and the subsequent ballot measure is approved by a majority of voters, the constitutional amendment would take effect on January 1, 2028.
This bill would let voters decide if people accused of a crime can ask the jury to ignore the law if they think the law is unfair. Right now, juries are only supposed to look at the facts and follow the law exactly as it is written. If this passes, a person on trial could argue that the law itself is bad or outdated.