100%(3)3 out of 3 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 13 - 16 out of 19 pages.
contracts or wills, and it would give the status of law to the orders of mafia bosses/gang leaders.H.L.A. Hart distinguished between “core” and “penumbral” cases. Using the hypothetical case of a statute prohibiting vehicles in parks, explain the difference between these two kinds of cases. What larger point was Hart trying to make by calling our attention to them? In a case where there is an SUV in a park, it is obvious that the statute of no vehicles applies. But, in a case where there is a toy car in a park, the statute is
not obvious. The toy car is a vehicle, but it is a toy and when the judge is making his decision, he must look elsewhere to decide whether or not the statute applies. Hart was trying to make the point that while the judge must look elsewhere, that elsewhere is not existential moral standards, but rather the intent of the legislators upon the making of that statute. If the intent was safety, then the judge can decide that the toy car is allowed, as it does not encroach upon the safety of others in the park, but if the intent was to protect the grass then the judge can decide that they toy car is a threat to the grass and is not allowed.What did Lon Fuller mean when he said that legal systems all have an “internal morality”? What are the components of that internal morality? How was Fuller’s theory criticized? Fuller meant that legal systems follow a system of requirements in order to belegal, the requirements can be seen as their “internal morality.” According to Fuller, laws must be general, promulgated, understandable, relatively constant throughout time, and applied in congruence with the way they were announced, but law must not be contradictory, require conduct beyond the abilities of those affected or retroactively made or applied. Critics of Fuller’s theory say that the rules can be found in “evil” as well as “good” legal systems, as well as sports and board games whose rules are not given the status of law.Argue for or against the following thesis: “Precedent does not really affect the outcome of judicial decisions.” Use the cases on domestic violence from North Carolina to support your point. While precedent is not the defining feature of judicial decisions, it does affectthem. For example, in the domestic violence cases from North Carolina, in one of them the judge expresses his belief that the outcome should have been different but that precedent was being followed and therefore the husband was found innocent.
Explain the difference between a common law and a civil law system. Which one of Max Weber’s four ideal typical approaches to legal reasoning would you use to classify each system? Why? In a common law legal system, judges have the ability to make laws through court decisions and the use of precent, but in a civil law legal system a judge deciding a given case has more freedom to interpret the text of a statute independently, and less predictably. Civil law legal systems would be under