David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In the State of Bernstein, operating a motor vehicle on a suspended license is a misdemeanor, punishable by permanent loss of one’s license. Officer Krupke arrests everyone who does this, as Tony has. But Tony says, “Gee, Officer Krupke, can’t you bend the rules? I went to your high school, you know.” Tony’s using a euphemism. He’s really asking Krupke to break the rules. Is there, however, a non-euphemistic way to bend a rule of law, without breaking it? More precisely, can we ever bend a rule while still applying it, in some sense, or is this just doubletalk? Consider the case of Maria, whose driver’s license has also been suspended. Maria lives with her mother in a remote area, twenty miles from the nearest doctor. Maria’s mother comes down with a fever of one hundred two. It’s not life-threatening, but Maria wants to spare her mother suffering and hasten recovery, so she drives to the hospital herself, rather than waiting for an ambulance to make the trip out and back. Unfortunately for Maria, the statute contains no applicable exception. I stipulate that this statute is not unjust or otherwise defective, as written. Suppose there are conclusive reasons for legislators not to complicate the statute with exceptions broad enough to cover cases such as Maria’s. Writing such exceptions would encourage sub-optimal misapplication of the exception by judges and sub-optimal misconduct by legal subjects who would anticipate (rightly or not) judicial misapplication of the statutory exception. Nevertheless, most will agree that Maria has strong reasons to act as she does. Rare is the writer who insists that rules of law trump all other reasons that bear on legal subjects. Some will insist that we give Maria’s mother a condition more life-threatening before they’ll assent.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jeffrey Brand-Ballard (2010). Limits of Legality: The Ethics of Lawless Judging. Oxford University Press.
J. Hage (2000). Rule Consistency. Law and Philosophy 19 (3):369-390.
Jaap Hage (1997). Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and its Underlying Logic. Kluwer.
Jacob Paroush (1997). Order Relations Among Efficient Decision Rules. Theory and Decision 43 (3):209-218.
Richard Holton (2011). Modeling Legal Rules. In Andrei Marmor & Scott Soames (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Language in the Law. Oxford University Press.
Maria Jesus Munoz-Torres, Maria Angeles Fernandez-Izquierdo & Maria Rosario Balaguer-Franch (2004). The Social Responsibility Performance of Ethical and Solidarity Funds: An Approach to the Case of Spain. Business Ethics 13 (2-3):200-218.
Aleksander Peczenik (1996). Jumps and Logic in the Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):297-329.
Steven J. Jensen (2008). Of Gnome and Gnomes. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 82 (3):411-428.
Alan H. Goldman (2001). Practical Rules: When We Need Them and When We Don't. Cambridge University Press.
Adam Cureton (2012). Solidarity and Social Moral Rules. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (5):691-706.
Guido Frongia (forthcoming). Wittgenstein on Breaking Rules. Grazer Philosophische Studien 33:263-284.
Timothy Endicott (2001). Are There Any Rules? Journal of Ethics 5 (3):199-219.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads2 ( #337,488 of 1,096,831 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?