Everyday Legal Reasoning and Compliance
Why Obey the Law and Pay Taxes?
There are many reasons why people choose to follow the law and pay their taxes. Some may do so because they believe it is their duty as a responsible citizen to contribute to the functioning of society (Austin). In contrast, others may fear the consequences of not doing so, such as fines or imprisonment (Austin). Additionally, some may follow the law because they believe it is necessary to maintain order and protect their rights and safety.
The Status of Unenforced Laws
Laws that are not enforced can still have legal consequences if broken. New York City has a law against jaywalking, but it may not always be strictly enforced. The decision of whether to enforce a law can be influenced by the severity of the offense, resources available to law enforcement, and local government officials’ priorities.
Understanding the Validity of Unjust or Immoral Laws
The status of unjust or immoral laws is a matter of ongoing debate in legal and ethical circles. Some argue that laws such as legislative action or civil disobedience should be challenged and changed peacefully (Austin). Others argue that individuals have a moral obligation to disobey such laws, even if it means facing legal consequences.
Moral Dilemmas: Responding to Immoral Laws
When faced with immoral laws, individuals may choose various actions. Some may work to change the law peacefully, while others may choose to disobey the law and face legal consequences (Austin). The decision to disobey an immoral law should be carefully considered, considering the potential risks and benefits.
Philosophical Reflections on Legal Positivism and Morality
Austin’s View: Law, Morality, and the Question of Obligation
Austin’s statement suggests that the existence of a law is a separate issue from its moral value or legitimacy, and it quite reflects my understating of law. There is a moral obligation to obey the law to maintain social order and stability, even if it is not morally just (Austin). The claim that something is the law carries some moral connotations, but its moral value must also be considered. Therefore, the fact that something is the law supplies a reason for compliance.
Law vs. Morality: Legal Positivism and the Grudge-Informer Cases
The positivist separation of law and morals helps to clarify the dilemma faced by the postwar German courts in the grudge-informer cases by emphasizing the importance of following the law as it is written, regardless of personal moral views (Austin). This approach allows the law to be a stable and predictable source of authority rather than subject to individual interpretation or moral judgment.
Hart’s Challenge to Austin: Legal Positivism in Democratic Societies
Hart’s updating of legal positivism recognizes the complexities of legal systems in democratic societies (Austin). I see that law is not solely based on the sovereign’s will but is a product of the interactions between various legal actors, such as lawmakers, judges, and citizens. I acknowledge that legal systems are subject to change and interpretation and that various social and political factors may influence legal rules.
Government Power and Moral Resistance
The power of the government is an important consideration when choosing whether to follow laws. However, individuals may also consider the moral value and legitimacy of the law and the potential consequences of disobedience. If faced with a morally abhorrent law, individuals may choose to challenge or change the law through peaceful means, such as legislative action or civil disobedience (Austin). The decision to disobey a law should be carefully considered based on various factors, including the individual’s values, the potential consequences of disobedience, and the likelihood of achieving desired outcomes.
Legal Positivism and the Lawless Zones
Legal positivism is a theory that asserts that the law is a social construct created by the government or other authorized sources. However, it has been criticized for its inability to explain the existence of law in areas lacking government control, two different factions claiming authority, or the government does not have the power to enforce its laws (Austin). In such cases, the laws may be determined by traditional or religious customs, cultural practices, or social norms and enforced by community leaders or informal mechanisms.
Work Cited
Austin, John. The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. John Murray, 1832.