Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issuesby Mike Masnick, TechdirtFeb. 08, 2011 |
Alan Dershowitz Pushing for Trump to Pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
Pew Research Poll Finds Most Countries Have Negative View of Israel
Elon Musk: 'Trump is in the Epstein Files. That is the Real Reason They Have Not Been Made Public'
ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt Demands 'Anti-Zionists' Be Banned Off Social Media 'Once And For All'
Palantir Exec: Pro-Palestine Protesters Are a 'Domestic Terrorist Movement'
![]() 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. |