Week 3 & justice.

I'm not dead yet, nobody is actually. Next week looks to be a little busier, with some extra reading and a couple short writing assignments, but 1L has still been entirely reasonable in its demands.

One word we have yet to hear meaningfully intoned is 'justice'. Not that I came to indulge some (in my case nonexistent) ideal about justice. But even the name of law school draws the distinction: though we'd probably all say that one of the highest ideals of the legal system is implementing "justice", we're not going to "justice school".

I took the most popular undergrad course at Harvard, called Justice, wherein a government professor occupied 15 weeks lecturing about various philosophical concepts of justice through history. As you can tell a lot of it stayed with me.

The various court opinions we've read so far will talk about "fairness" and considerations of morals and social policy but they stay far away from the J-word.

I think the answer is hidden in plain view: the legal system may produce justice as a side effect, but it is not (and could not be) designed to do so. For instance, civil procedure is described by the teacher as a means of dispute resolution -- not a means of producing justice in disputes.

And maybe "resolution" contains the clue: what law provides is solutions. One thing I'm gratified by is how concrete legal education is: there's no hundreds of pages of theory occasionally punctuated by a case that happens to illustrate some ideal behavior. The textbooks are built around the history of actual cases, actual opinions, actual mistakes, actual resolutions.

And what you quickly see is that part of the nature of law is that it's full of holes, some small, some large. Cases roll into those holes and humans have to kind of tow them out of the ditch using logic and common sense and other reasonable but fallible faculties of judgment.

Indeed, part of a successful judicial opinion is that it fills as few holes as needed to resolve the case, and leaves the rest open to another day -- so they can be addressed under the practical requirements of a future case, and not solved as some kind of thought experiment in the present.

10 Sep 04

Comments

We are enjoying reading your notes on your first year of law school. I was particularly amused by your comments on the absence of justice. Going through the divorce process let me know in aces that the system was not about justice, but about dispute resolution, whether is civil or criminal.

You would enjoy reading Alan Dershowitz' book called "The Genesis of Justice." No surpise, he traces the evolution of thinking about justice and law back to the Old Testament and the Garden of Eden...Cain slew Abel, etc.

We love you. Looking forward to seeing you in November. Hope US Air is still flying!

Posted by: Jimby at September 11, 2004 06:34 AM
end take out comments -->
matthewb @ ucla
For Superfans Only
Click here to see the whole damn blog on one page

Recent Drivel
Home page
Okay, I lied. Epilogue 4
Epilogue 3: The End (really)
Epilogue 2: Nov 2007
Epilogue
The eagle has landed
Seduced by the dark side
You've been in law school too long when...
Diplomas
I have only five more class days
The lone gunman
The last spring break is over
Someone saved your life tonight
Best advice
Alumni donations
Dean Schill & the Pussymobile
Help me yet again
Grant Nelson comes out of the closet
On groupwork
The futility of the ranking quest
"Split the baby"
I approve
Buffalo Wings
Wall St Journal Law Blog
Matthew Black Orchestra
Search

How time flies
September 2008
June 2008
November 2007
July 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
RSS Feed
right here buddy