F a i r D e a l i n g ( S h o r t E x c e r p t )Reading: Ch. 34. Letter from Birmingham Jail(Philosophical Problems in the Law)Author: Martin Luther King Jr.Editor: David M. AdamsPublisher: WadsworthPublication Date: 2000Pages: 213-217Course: PHIL 338A 001 2022W1 Philosophy of Law - PHIL OF LAWCourse Code: 001Term: 2022W1Department: PHILCopyright Statement of ResponsibilityThis copy was made pursuant to the Fair Dealing Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff, which may be found at. The copy may only be used for the purpose of research, privatestudy, criticism, review, news reporting, education, satire or parody. If the copy is used for the purpose of review,criticism or news reporting, the source and the name of the author must be mentioned. The use of this copy for anyother purpose may require the permission of the copyright owner.For more information on UBC\'s Copyright Policies, please visitUBC CopyrightPowered by TCPDF ()
213Letter from BirminghamJailcussed in a courtroom.. . .It is precisely this politi-cal motive that has left some courts, like the districtcourt in this case, uneasy. . . . Because these at-tempts to invoke the necessity defense force thecourts to choose among causes they should makelegitimate by extending the defense of necessity,and because the criminal acts, themselves, do notmaximize social good, they should be subject to aper serule of exclusion.ConclusionBecause the necessity defense was not intended asjustification for illegal acts taken in indirect politi-cal protest, we affirm the district court's refusal toadmit evidence of necessity.Affirmed.conduct which could reasonably be expected toabate an imminent evil. . . . A prisoner fleeing aburning jail, for example, would not be asked towait in his cell because someone might conceivablysave him; such a legal alternative is ill-suited toavoiding death in a fire. In other words, the law im-plies a reasonableness requirement in judgingwhether legal alternatives exist.Where the targeted harm is the existence of alaw or policy, our precedents counsel that this rea-sonableness requirement is met simply by the pos-sibility of congressional action....The real problem here is that litigants are try-ing to distort to their purposes an age-old commonlaw doctrine meant for a very different set of cir-cumstances. What these cases are really about isgaining notoriety for a cause—the defense allowsprotestors to get their political grievances dis-34.Letter from BirminghamJailMa r t inLu t h e rKin g, Jr.like to answer your statement in what I hope willbe patient and reasonable terms.I think I should give the reason for my beingin Birmingham, since you have been influenced bythe argument of "outsiders coming in." I have thehonor of serving as president of the SouthernChristian Leadership Conference, an organizationoperating in every southern state, with headquar-ters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eight-fiveaffiliate organizations all across the South—onebeing the Alabama Christian Movement forHuman Rights. Whenever necessary and possiblewe share staff, educational and financial resourceswith our affiliates. Several months ago our local af-filiate here in Birmingham invited us to be on callto engage in a nonviolent direct-action programif such were deemed necessary. We readilyMy dear Fellow Clergymen,
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
End of preview. Want to read all 6 pages?
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
