Paradigm of the Conflict mingled with Law and Morality: Simss Case
The conflict amidst legal positivism and natural righteousness theory basically stems from the intervention of moralistic values into legal formation. Legal positivism argues that the spheres of law and morality argon unadorned i.e. the validity of a law and its moral quality argon two different things whereas natural law theory, from a moral point of view, insists on the idea that laws ought to be just. In this manner, the Simss Case is a paradigm example of the conflict between moral curbs and legal rules. Thus, ones attitude towards Simss Case reflects ones position on the duality between legal positivism and natural law theory. In this manner, an analysis of Judge Lemuel Shaws decision in Simss Case in terms of whether it was defensible is crucial. From a legal positivists aspect, I will argue that Judge Lemuel Shaws decision was defensible because it was constitutional and valid within the legal system as well as it was constituted in reasonable and reasonable manner.
Besides, Harts theory on the rule of recognition as well as his distinction between moral value and legal validity of law are useful to investigate the Simss Case.
As for the Simss Case, gibe to US Constitution at the time, if a slave manages to get off to a state where slavery is illegal, the slave should be returned to his ascertain by the authorities. According to the law of 1850, when a slave proprietor or his representative claims that a certain person in a state where slavery is illegal is a fleer slave, a federal commissioner decides without a due procedure of discharge in which the accused person can defend himself. In our case, Thomas Sims lives in Boston, Massachusetts was claimed to be property of Mr. Potter...If you penury to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .
No comments:
Post a Comment