Photo Credit: Cody Mello-Klein, Robin Hood or cold-blooded killer? Jury selection and jury nullification will be key in Luigi Mangione’s murder trial, legal expert explains, Northeastern Global News (February 19, 2025), https://news.northeastern.edu/2025/02/19/luigi-mangione-trial-jury/.
Authored by: Kaley E. Breland
As children, we begin to learn some of our most important lessons in morality through the stories of folk heroes. We often continue to search for these larger-than-life characters well into our adult lives, and we generally look to those that represent and fight for a cause that we believe in, even if their actions may be controversial.[1] This raises the question—what happens when someone who society has deemed a modern folk hero is accused of a serious crime, such as murder? Just how far is a jury willing to stretch the law when they are faced with a sympathetic defendant? Is it possible for the defendant to have an impartial and “fair” trial? These are the questions that legal experts are currently grappling with regarding alleged murderer Luigi Mangione—society’s “modern day Robin Hood.”
At 6:44 AM on December 4, 2024, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was fatally shot as he was entering the New York Hilton Midtown by a masked gunman who then fled the scene.[2] The manhunt for the masked shooter lasted for five days before 26-year-old Luigi Mangione was identified and taken into custody on December 9th.[3] Following his arrest, Mangione was charged in a federal court with one count of using a firearm to commit murder, one count of interstate stalking resulting in death, one count of stalking through use of interstate facilities resulting in death, and one count of discharging a firearm that was equipped with a silencer in furtherance of a crime of violence.[4] He has also been indicted by a grand jury in a New York state court on eleven different counts.[5] His state charges include one count of murder in the first degree, which alleges he killed the CEO in an act of terrorism, two counts of murder in the second degree, and various other weapon and forgery charges.[6]
Mangione has been met with an unprecedented level of public sympathy. His supporters liken him to a modern-day Robin Hood, and they justify his alleged actions because they see him as someone who represents their frustrations with both the healthcare industry and the inequality of wealth distribution in the United States.[7] Mangione has received extensive support on social media, where sympathizers make posts that sensationalize Mangione and the motives behind his alleged actions.[8] Many of his supporters have also turned to crowdfunding platforms to raise money to fund Mangione’s defense.[9] Notably, a campaign on the website GiveSendGo raised over $100,000 by December 15, 2024—a mere eleven days after the shooting.[10] As a result of this sympathy, some legal experts have expressed concerns that jury nullification could lead to Mangione’s acquittal.[11]
Jury nullification is:
[a] jury’s knowing and deliberate rejection of the evidence or refusal to apply the law either because the jury wants to send a message about some social issue that is larger than the case itself or because the result dictated by law is contrary to the jury’s sense of justice, morality, or fairness.[12]
The practice of jury nullification was initially accepted during the American Revolution; however, as the revolution faded, so did the willingness of courts to accept jury nullification, leading to the United States v. Battiste decision, which limited juror independence.[13] In that decision, a Massachusetts district court held that jurors have the power to nullify, but they do not have the moral right to nullify.[14] Further building upon the Battiste holding, the United States Supreme Court in 1895 held that “juries have no right to judge the law,” and the defendant is not entitled to a jury instruction informing jurors of their power to nullify.[15] The majority of courts today follow these holdings when presented with issues of jury nullification.[16]
Some legal experts have expressed concerns that Mangione may not receive a “fair” trial due to the mass amounts of public sympathy he has received, and they cite jury nullification as a huge potential risk.[17] These experts note that social media platforms have amplified the conversation surrounding Brian Thompson’s murder, which has shaped the narrative and also led to the development of polarized opinions on both sides of the issue.[18] As a result of this “trial by media,” activists who sympathize with Mangione’s alleged motives have the ability to “leverage platforms to promote their causes, influencing juror decisions in pursuit of perceived moral justice,” and there have already been instances of these activists advocating for nullification in Mangione’s upcoming trial.[19] Beyond the issue of social media, experts have also noted that a vast majority of Americans have had negative experiences with the American healthcare system, stating that “[i]n New York City, statistically it’s going to be hard to get 12 people where at least some of them are not going to be open to what [Mangione] did.”[20] Overall, these experts warn that the combination of a trial by media and the growing unrest with the American healthcare system could implicate the issue of nullification in Mangione’s trial.
On the other hand, there are some legal experts who do not express the same level of concern about the potential for nullification; rather, they anticipate that the jury will remain loyal to the oath that they took when they were selected to serve on the jury.[21] These experts have warned about the dangers of acquitting Mangione and the impact it could have in encouraging similar attacks in the future.[22] They warn that our legal system is dependent on fair and impartial juries, so setting a precedent that a murderer caught in broad daylight could be acquitted so long as he is sympathetic threatens foundations of our legal system.[23] Syracuse University College of Law professor Gregory Germain notes “[m]any of us hate insurance companies and have had difficult experiences dealing with insurance companies, but that doesn’t mean we think people should be going around murdering insurance executives in the street.”[24]
The trial of Luigi Mangione presents a critical test for the American legal system, highlighting the tension between the rule of law and public sentiment. While his supporters view him as a modern-day Robin Hood, the jury must still determine whether he is guilty of murder based on the evidence presented to them rather than moral justifications. The potential for jury nullification underscores the power and responsibility of jurors in shaping justice, but it also raises concerns about the integrity of our legal system, which relies on juror impartiality. This trial will serve as a case study in how social media, public opinion, and frustrations with systemic issues can influence courtroom proceedings. Ultimately, the outcome of this case will set a precedent for how justice is served when a “trial by media” clashes with the law.
[1] Peter Suciu, Luigi Mangione Has Become A Social Media Folk Hero, Forbes (December 12, 2024, 9:41 AM), https://www.forbes.com/sites/petersuciu/2024/12/12/luigi-mangione-has-become-a-social-media-folk-hero/ (“The American public has long been captivated by those who seemed to take on the system, even when they employed violence to do so.”).
[2] Chris Looft, Emily Shapiro, & Aaron Katersky, UnitedHealthcare shooting suspect’s timeline before, during, and after the brazen murder, ABC News (December 18, 2024, 9:11 AM), https://abcnews.go.com/US/unitedhealthcare-ceo-shooting-suspects-movements-timeline/story?id=116504579.
[3] Id.
[4] Press Release, U.S. Department of Justice, Luigi Mangione Charged with the Stalking and Murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson and Use of a Silencer in a Crime of Violence (February 6, 2025) (on file with author).
[5] Emma Tucker, Lauren del Valle, Kara Scannell, & Zoe Sottile, Even for an administrative hearing, Luigi Mangione draws crowds at New York City courthouse, CNN (February 22, 2025, 6:38 AM), https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/us/mangione-court-charges-united-ceo-killing/index.html.
[6] Id.
[7] Suciu, supra note 2.
[8] Id.
[9] Peter Suciu, Social Media ‘Sympathy’ For Luigi Mangione Risks Jury Nullification, Forbes (December 16, 2024, 12:12 PM), https://www.forbes.com/sites/petersuciu/2024/12/16/social-media-sympathy-for-luigi-mangione-risks-jury-nullification/.
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Jury Nullification, Black’s Law Dictionary (12th ed. 2024).
[13] Mary Claire Mulligan, Jury Nullification: Its History and Practice, 33 Colo. Law., Dec. 2004, at 72, 73.
[14] Id. (explaining that the Battiste court was concerned with the uncertainty that results from nullification because it would be “impossible to ascertain the jury’s interpretation of the law”).
[15] Id.
[16] Id.
[17] Suciu, supra note 2.
[18] Id.
[19] Id.
[20] Id.
[21] Safia Samee Ali, Could fandom cause jury nullification in Luigi Mangione trial?, NewsNation (January 29, 2025, 3:02 PM), https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/fandom-jury-nullification-luigi-mangione-trial/ (“If people think they will get off the hook because a victim is unsympathetic, that may lead to similar attacks . . . In the Mangione case, it’s even more concerning because this appears to be a planned attack.”).
[22] Id.
[23] Id.
[24] Id.
American Journal of Trial Advocacy 