If the race is utilized in a manner recommended by Butler, it breaks up the foundation of the system and opens up Pandora’s box metaphorically, as other parties can then utilize the courts to meet or advocate their demands, regardless of if they are morally justified or not. Jurors take a pledge to serve justice in accordance with the law of the U.S. Constitution and their federal and state regulations. By veering from the letter of the law and their duties as prescribed by the law, it culminates in a social effect where jury trials will be utilized for political and social gains rather than their purpose of ensuring the fairness of trials (not social contexts of the crimes, arrests, and prosecution).
Criminal cases are incredibly complex and not usually a two-sided decision that a jury member can consider. Furthermore, the due process of law also has its upsides, such as the Scottsboro case, which began a critical process of ensuring counsel rights for defendants, and after appeals, the majority of the defendants were released. While following Butler’s call to action, these boys would have been acquitted surely, but the outcomes suggest that the ‘judicious attention’ which Kennedy argues is the more effective way of creating change, by using the tools available by the law and appeals to higher courts as a manner of creating policy and ensuring rights for the defendants that the juries may seek to protect. Kennedy advocated for politics of respectability as a counter to jury nullification, as the practice is ultimately a two-edged sword that, in either outcome, still results in the corrosion of the rule of law.