They believe that "with fully-informed juries, the government cannot exercise its power over the people without the consent of the people." (Iowa State Bar: Position Papers) In light of the Supreme Court's in Sparf, the FIJA is determined to advise all Americans of their rights. In fact the FIJA views jury nullification not only as a right, but also as a duty of the jury. They understand that in order to maintain a true democracy the legislature, which represents the will of the majority, must be in line with the needs and desires of the minority; and if the two do not see eye to eye the minority must have the ability to remedy the situation through the use of jury nullification. .
.
In 1994 the FIJA proposed The Fully Informed Jury Bill. In short it stated that:.
An accused or aggrieved party's right to trial by jury, in all instances where the government or any of its agencies is an opposing party, includes the right to inform the jurors of their power to judge the law as well as the evidence, and to vote on the verdict according to conscience.
This right shall not be infringed by any statute, juror oath, court order, or procedure or practice of the court, including the use of any method of jury selection, which could preclude or limit the empanelment of jurors willing to exercise this power. (Clay 165).
Although legislation like this has yet to be passed, similar legislation has been proposed in over half of the United States. In Iowa, for example, jury nullification legislation was proposed in 2000. If passed, judges in Iowa would be required "to give an instruction [on nullification] to the jury in all cases (civil or criminal) in which the State is the plaintiff. The instruction would tell the jury to judge the law as well as the evidence, and to render a verdict dictated by conscientious consideration." (Iowa State Bar: Position Papers) After careful consideration the legislation was rejected.
