Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issuesby Mike Masnick, TechdirtFeb. 08, 2011 |
Trump Welcomes 'The Highly Respected' Alan Dershowitz Into The GOP, Shills His New Book
House Passes NDAA With Section 219 Aimed at 'Merging' U.S. and Israeli Militaries
Netanyahu Confirms Plan to 'Merge' U.S. and Israeli Militaries
Sen. Graham Worked With Israeli Officials to Push GOP Senators to Pass Aid Package, Amb. Reveals
Sen. Lindsey Graham Dead at 71
![]() Radley Balko points us to the news that a judge in Florida has banned the distribution of certain flyers at or around the courthouse. Apparently, there's a group called the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) -- which seems like a pretty good idea. Why wouldn't we want fully informed juries? The group has been handing out pamphlets to jurors which basically say that the jurors should vote with their conscience and not feel pressured into voting against what they believe. Seems like pretty standard stuff. However, it looks like Chief Judge Belvin Perry doesn't like fully informed juries. He signed an order barring the group from handing out their pamphlets... raising all sorts of free speech and prior restraint questions. In order to try to get around the prior restraint question, Judge Perry stated that this "restriction upon expressive conduct" was "necessary to serve the state's compelling interest in protecting the integrity of the jury system." The judge clearly knows he's treading in free speech/prior restraint waters in specifically noting that it's a restriction of expression and calling out the "compelling interest" line. Of course, you can't just say there's a compelling interest. There actually has to be one, and I'm struggling to see how better informing a juror of their rights as a juror could possibly be about manipulating a jury or would harm the integrity of the jury system. Wouldn't you think a juror who better understand what being a juror means increases the integrity of the system? It's almost as if the judge is admitting that they want uninformed jurors who don't know their own rights. It sounds like the group is fighting back, so hopefully the ban will soon be reversed and the judge will be given a refresher course in the First Amendment and free speech. |