It isn't clear to me whether you're arguing that halting the machine of criminal justice by making it impossible to find an impartial jury will be result in positive changes in the criminal justice system or positive changes in internet privacy law (maybe both?). I'm inclined to agree with Dana that your plan won't actually "halt" the machine, and trials will just go on with biased juries in place. (Besides the logistical issues that arise from even implementing the plan.) But your paper made me think about an idea that has come up for me quite a bit this semester - whether it is better to try to reform a system from within, or destroy/halt a system from without and hope that something better arises in its place. It also made me think of Mario Savio's words at one of Berkeley's first major student protests (Dec. 1964): "There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all."

-- ElizabethDoisy - 09 May 2009