Legal expert explains Trump's longshot bid to find a juror who will 'not follow the law'

Former President Donald Trump just lost his third effort this week to get the Manhattan hush money trial delayed, clearing the way for it to begin next week. But he has one last plan up his sleeve, argued former Trump impeachment lawyer Norm Eisen for CNN.

Specifically, he's going to try to make sure at least one MAGA devotee gets onto the jury, who could deadlock the verdict.

"It appears to me that he is attempting to reach his supporters in Manhattan in the hopes that at least one will make it onto the jury and then steadfastly refuse to convict him — no matter the strength of the evidence," wrote Eisen. "Judge Juan Merchan’s just-released and extremely detailed jury questionnaire demonstrates that he’s on guard against Trump’s maneuvering — but that doesn’t mean that, if this is Trump’s strategy, the former president won’t continue to try."

ALSO READ: A criminologist explains why keeping Trump from the White House is all that matters

Despite the instructions of judges, juries can choose to disregard much of what they're ordered to do and acquit a defendant based on their political opposition to the case, rather than the facts — this is what's known as "jury nullification." This is a longstanding matter of controversy in many high-profile cases; some legal observers believe jury nullification was behind the acquittal of far-right activist Ammon Bundy for his occupation of a wildlife refuge in Oregon, although at least some jurors dispute this.

"When I was a criminal defense lawyer in Washington, DC in the 1990s, the phenomenon was the subject of considerable attention because some of our jurors were fed up with the war on drugs and the associated police strategies," wrote Eisen. "No matter how overwhelming the proof, prosecutors found that they would get a juror who simply would not follow the law. Because criminal juries must be unanimous, even one such juror is enough to prevent a guilty verdict."

Eisen, who is out with a new book about legal fights against Trump, argues that the pattern of Trump throwing up a series of "obviously losing arguments" in the hush money case suggests he's trying to give any of his supporters on the jury ammunition to refuse to convict.

"If, as the evidence suggests, Trump is trying for jury nullification, it is hardly a sign of strength," he concluded. "On the contrary, as I argue in my book, Trump is in a position of weakness. He is at great risk of conviction and a sentence of incarceration, and he knows it. That is reflected in his desperate motions strategy, whatever its explanation."