The Role of Alexander Hamilton in Federal Governments in the United States of America

What is the most significant part of Hamilton’s argument in Federalist 70? Why does Hamilton argue in favour of a single executive? Are the comparisons Hamilton makes to the Roman warranted? Alexander Hamilton is considered as the founder of principles that govern Federal Governments in the United States of America and thus the true architect of the modern administrative state. Hamilton’s most significant argument in Federal 70 was the creation of a strong executive.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Role of Alexander Hamilton in Federal Governments in the United States of America specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Hamilton in Federalist 70 believed that good governance could only be attained through an energetic and accountable executive. A critical look at Hamilton’s argument that was attached to the structure of government, administration and rule of law as well as policies is still releva nt in the contemporary United States of America. Hamilton expressed that a strong executive is a fundamental requirement for a nation’s economic prosperity, a view he held so dearly that he made political rivalry between him and people who held different views. It is imperative to note that during constitutional convention which was held in 1787, he advocated for a government in the form of an elected monarchy. This opinion was shot down by delegates in the convention. In spite of the defeat, he continued advocating for creation of a strong executive. Hamilton’s views of a strong executive were anchored on the failures of the confederation plan which aimed at over-devolution of government affairs. It was evident that a plan of devolution that gave states maximum discretion over the federal government was improper. This was because of difficulties in formulating and ratifying rules to govern the same which took years to come up with largely due to disagreements in bound aries and commerce. In order to support the views of Alexander Hamilton, failure among states to work under the terms of the Paris Treaty that ended the Revolutionary War made leaders to agree on making a strong government that would supervise affairs of the states. This agreement was reached after states started formulating their own independent foreign policies while other states fought on whom to control the western land. By 1787, it was evident that the devolution plan was not working and the solution to this would be formulating a strong federal government that would have executive powers over the states’ governments.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The quest for a strong executive was echoed by Alexander Hamilton and being the first treasury secretary, he planned and wrote reports on modalities of creating strong executive government. His reports included report on public credit, manufacturing and creation of a national banking system. Hamilton considered three basic principles in his views regarding the newly agitated public administration structure and strategy. Firstly, Hamilton considered independence, responsibility and power as key principles that would indeed play a role if a strong executive agenda would succeed and give good results. According to Hamilton, the laws that had been ratified by the congress posed limitations on the independence of the federal government. It was his wish that for the executive to be able to implement laws, it required independence and freedom. It was also evident that Hamilton in his later works (such as in Federalist71) showed that there was need for separation of powers between the executive and the legislature. In addition, he showed that it was important to vest adequate authority to the executive such as freedom to determine how best to implement and administer laws. Hamilton was strongly convinced that a weak government was bound to deliver poor results mainly due to bad policies. He also believed that there was much needed for a decisive organ that would drive policies on behalf of states’ governments. In addition, Hamilton held the view that it required a strong government to protect the people’s interest if they required to rule and be served at the same time. It is evident that the Federalist 70 (a book by Hamilton) was probably the first of its kind on the subject of public administration whose relevance was noted almost a century later. The book outlined what was entailed by â€Å"energy in the executive†. On the principle of power, Hamilton outlined that a strong executive required unity, and that there ought to have been a president as the leader of the government who should be in power for a definite duration of time. Also, he said that the president was supposed to be competent enough to be able understand and push policies for the good of the nation. The third principle of responsibility was aimed at keeping the executive government accountable so that it didn’t exhibit or exercise too much power. Hamilton suggested that for the executive to be accountable, it required Congress that would supervise it.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Role of Alexander Hamilton in Federal Governments in the United States of America specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Although Hamilton’s view on separation of powers between the legislature and executive was received well, he suggested that it could not be enough to vest all the authority to the Congress to check the executive. There was need for a stronger executive branch (Congress) that could have power to impeach even the president. There was strong need to check the executive so that it does not exercise too much power. Therefore, the proposed government would be responsible for its actions for the g ood of the citizen of the nation. In order to prove that his argument was the only way to push for the economic development agenda and a change from agrarian dependent economy to manufacturing, Hamilton in the capacity of treasury secretary was instrumental in the planning and creation of the First Bank of the United States of America which was government-supported. Hamilton’s view on a long term vision was that when an executive government is in place, it is possible to formulate policies that can change even the economic position of the nation. His vision of a manufacturing driven economy was that it would play a major role for America to engage in global commerce compared to an economy driven by agriculture. Hamilton’s strong support for a powerful government led by an executive leader was envisioned in the future of America in the sense that an economic transformation would only be possible when a strong executive was is in place to push the agenda forward. Hamilto n’s values for the administration of the United States of America can be summarized as a system that blends a strong executive (monarchy), a strong legislature (democratic) and an independent judicial system which has powers to overrule the will of the majority if liberty is destroyed (aristocracy). To enable this kind of system to flourish peacefully, there is need to balance them in such a way that none becomes more superior to the other or vise versa.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More It was evident that Alexander Hamilton admired and also had passion for Rome. His envisioned America resembled what used to be the administration in Ancient Roman Republic. Rome portrayed a history whose greatness was achieved through trade and commerce. In addition, this history was established and strongly supported by military of elite. It is generally viewed that Rome’s administration was strategized to command and conquer. The empire in Rome was mandated to protect the interests of the people led by a central figure. This was the exact vision that Hamilton had for American administration. In his era, Caesar was referred to as a destroyer of republics and thus never enjoyed the admiration of many people. However, Hamilton admired him and referred to him as â€Å"the greatest villain and the founder†. As mentioned earlier, Humiliations view was to have an executive leader whose mandate was to give an informed leadership by pushing forward the policies that would mak e America great. The Roman Empire shared the same set up. Hamilton’s vision would be put into operation by employing policies and mechanism that would reduce poverty through funding and assumption or through empowering the rich and employing mechanisms of expanding trade throughout the world. The latter would be put in place while still enforcing domestic fiscal authority. This strategy would be possible if a strong executive was put in place to push for these agendas. Hamilton’s vision encompassed a strong government’s quest to empower members of the political elite that would transform the administration from within. To date, America’s administration reflects the foundation that was laid by the founder of modern administration, Alexander Hamilton. His argument regarding the Roman Republic and his admiration of the system of administration in Rome are indeed warranted. Hamilton participated in the enactment of some of his proposals in the constitution th at changed the administration of the United States. Therefore, he can be rightfully referred to as the founder of modern administration in the United States of America. This essay on The Role of Alexander Hamilton in Federal Governments in the United States of America was written and submitted by user Aaden Combs to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Pandillas como MS-13 y leyes migratorias de EE.UU.

Pandillas como MS-13 y leyes migratorias de EE.UU. Ser miembro de una pandilla como la MS-13 o la Mara Salvatrucha, o incluso la simple sospecha de pertenencia actual o pasada causa problemas migratorios gravà ­simos para todos los extranjeros presentes en el paà ­s. Por su gran impacto migratorio, este artà ­culo informa sobre quà © es una pandilla, conocida tambià ©n como mara, cà ³mo las autoridades migratorias obtienen informacià ³n sobre quià ©n es o puede ser pandillero, cules son las consecuencias migratorias y quà © se puede hacer si se tienen problemas por esta razà ³n.  ¿Quà © se considera que es una pandilla o mara? No hay una definicià ³n legal à ºnica sobre quà © es una pandilla. Sin embargo, el Departamento de Seguridad Interna (DHS, por sus siglas en inglà ©s), del que dependen organismos migratorios como ICE y USCIS, considera que una pandilla es una asociacià ³n formal o informal de tres o ms personas que tiene como uno de sus principales objetivos cometer uno o ms delitos. Es decir, una mara no tiene que ser una organizacià ³n grande y conocida como la Mara Salvatrucha, la MS-13 o los Latin Kings.  ¿Cà ³mo saben las autoridades migratorias que un migrante es pandillero? Las autoridades migratorias consultan una o varias bases de datos que incluyen informacià ³n sobre las personas que pertenecen a alguna de esas organizaciones o de quienes se sospecha que tienen algà ºn tipo de afiliacià ³n con las mismas o, incluso, quienes pertenecieron en el pasado. Entre la informacià ³n que se registra en las bases de datos se encuentran los nombres de los pandilleros, apodos, direccià ³n, descripcià ³n fà ­sica y marcas, como por ejemplo lunares o cicatrices, tatuajes, nacionalidad, identificacià ³n de la pandilla a la que pertenecen o con la que se sospecha que estn afiliados y posicià ³n dentro de la misma. Entre las bases de datos ms utilizadas destaca GangNet. Se sabe que la utilizan al menos el FBI, ICE - la agencia encargada de ejecutar las leyes migratorias- , 14 estados y el Distrito de Columbia. En 2016, ICE dejà ³ de utilizar ICEGangs y ahora busca informacià ³n sobre posibles pandilleros en la citada GangNet y en otras bases de datos como, ICM, EID y FALCON. Adems, estados, condados o ciudades pueden tener sus propias bases de datos para este fin. Una de las ms completas es CalGang, a la cual aà ±aden informacià ³n todos los departamentos de policà ­a del estado de California. Se da por hecho entre los abogados migratorios que el Departamento de Seguridad Interna, del cual dependen ICE y USCIS, tiene acceso a la informacià ³n que contienen muchas de esas bases de datos locales o estatales, pero se desconoce el alcance de la colaboracià ³n.  ¿Cà ³mo se incluye una persona en una base de datos sobre pandillas o maras? Segà ºn el Centro de Recursos Legales Migratorios (ILRC, por sus siglas en inglà ©s), el nombre de una persona puede incluirse en una base de datos sobre pertenencia o afiliacià ³n con maras en cuatro situaciones. En primer lugar, como resultado de la investigacià ³n de un delito. En segundo lugar, por lo que se declara cuando se est en custodia de la policà ­a. En tercer lugar, por condena en un juicio y, en cuarto lugar, como consecuencia de lo que un agente anota durante lo que se conoce como una entrevista de campo (field interview, en inglà ©s). En este contexto, debe entenderse como una entrevista de campo una interaccià ³n entre un pandillero o sospecho de serlo y un agente de la policà ­a que tiene lugar en un vecindario de una ciudad con un alto à ­ndice de presencia pandillera. Cada estado establece sus propias reglas para determinar cundo el agente puede incluir a una persona en una base de datos de pandillas, por lo que es imposible brindar reglas generales. Sin embargo, en California, donde la presencia pandillera es notable, la ley permite la inclusià ³n de una persona en CalGang si cumple al menos dos de los siguientes requisitos: Ha reconocido pertenecer a una maraHa sido arrestada en compaà ±Ãƒ ­a de personas conocidas como pandillerosHa sido identificada como miembro de una pandilla por un informanteExhibe sà ­mbolos o gestos manuales propios de pandillasTiene tatuajes propios de pandillasFrecuenta lugares en los que se reà ºnen las pandillasViste ropa que se identifica con una determinada mara Como consecuencia de la laxitud de los requisitos para ser incluido en una base de datos sobre pandillas, entre los defensores de los migrantes se argumenta que muchas de las personas incluidas en las mismas no son, en realidad, pandilleros. Adems, cuando una persona est detenida en una crcel o prisià ³n no migratoria frecuentemente se registra su afiliacià ³n con una pandilla - verificada o presunta- para evitar colocar en el mismo mà ³dulo carcelario a miembros de distintas organizaciones. Asimismo, agencias migratorias como la Policà ­a Fronteriza (CBP, por sus siglas en inglà ©s) e ICE tambià ©n registran si una persona es sospechosa de pertenecer a pandillas e incluso agencias privadas que gestionan crceles migratorias, como CCA y GEO, tambià ©n realizan esta clase de anotaciones. Por otro lado, hay que tener en consideracià ³n que cada jurisdiccià ³n establece las reglas sobre si es obligatorio notificar a una persona que ha sido incluida en alguna de dichas bases de datos o registros sobre pertenencia a pandillas, por lo que en muchos casos el interesado no sabe que su nombre ha sido incluido. Una vez que el nombre ha sido incluido, es muy difà ­cil sacarlo de la base de datos. Estar incluido en una base de datos de maras,  ¿cà ³mo afecta a los asuntos migratorios? La pertenencia a pandillas se considera, desde el punto de vista migratorio, como una amenaza a la seguridad nacional de los Estados Unidos, lo cual significa que si un migrante es calificado como tal, tiene un problema migratorio gravà ­simo. Hay que destacar distintas situaciones. En primer lugar, si una persona extranjera est detenida por Inmigracià ³n y se sabe o sospecha que es miembro de una pandilla como los Latin King, MS-13 o Mara Salvatrucha, no va a obtener una fianza o, si la obtuviese, va a ser por un monto muy alto. Adems, se inicia un procedimiento de deportacià ³n o expulsià ³n en su contra. No cabe duda de que la pertenencia actual o pasada a una pandilla o mara es causa prioritaria de deportacià ³n. En el caso de migrantes no detenidos que solicitan un beneficio migratorio, como un ajuste de estatus, por ejemplo, DACA para jà ³venes indocumentados que llegaron a Estados Unidos siendo nià ±os o la visa U para và ­ctimas de violencia, dicho beneficio puede ser negado y, de hecho, eso es lo que sucede en la mayorà ­a de los casos. La denegacià ³n del beneficio migratorio puede deberse porque se pregunta especà ­ficamente en el formulario de aplicacià ³n sobre pertenencia a pandillas y, en caso de que asà ­ sea, se aplica lo que se conoce como causa de inadmisibilidad (a)(3)(B) que da lugar a que no se pueda estar en EE.UU. y se inicie un proceso de deportacià ³n. En otros casos en los que no se se realiza esa pregunta, como es el caso de los formularios de DACA, el beneficio ser negado casi siempre porque el oficial del USCIS tiene el poder discrecional de decidir si aprueba el beneficio que se solicita y, en el caso de los pandilleros, la regla general es no aprobarlo.  ¿Quà © se puede hacer cuando un migrante es sospechoso de pandillero? Estos son casos muy delicados y que deben ser siempre tratados en confidencialidad con un abogado que tenga experiencia en este tipo de casos y que conozca las reglas y reglamentos del estado respecto a pandillas y bases de datos. Si una persona extranjera se ha movido en cà ­rculos pandilleros, aunque no haya pertenecido a ninguna pandilla o si realmente ha tenido membresà ­a en alguna de ellas, deberà ­a consultar con un abogado antes de solicitar cualquier tipo de beneficio migratorio, ya que podrà ­a estar provocando el inicio de un proceso de deportacià ³n en su contra. Es importante que el abogado conozca si el estado est obligado a comunicar la inclusià ³n de una persona en la base de datos. En el caso de que se produzca dicha comunicacià ³n, se debe contratar a un abogado para que intente apelar y borrar el nombre del migrante de dicha base de datos. Si se vive en una jurisdiccià ³n donde la autoridad no est obligada a notificar la inclusià ³n de una persona en un registro de maras, es importante que el abogado intente recabar esa informacià ³n indirectamente. Por ejemplo, solicitando rà ©cords de posibles arrestos, de oficiales de libertad condicional o parole o, incluso, de high school, ya que en muchas escuelas se realizan anotaciones sobre posible pertenencia a pandillas de los estudiantes. Puntos clave Las pandillas o maras son consideradas una amenaza a la seguridad de EE.UU.Membresà ­a o sospecha de pertenencia a pandillas es causa de problemas migratorios graves.Existen varias bases de datos de pandilleros. Es posible estar en una sin saberlo. Este es un artà ­culo informativo. No es asesorà ­a legal.

Nanotechnology benefits and effects in military application Essay

Nanotechnology benefits and effects in military application - Essay Example Various debates have been held by different researching groups and governments to discuss the implications of nanotechnology in future. This is because the technology has a potential of creating many materials and devices that have wide applications in fields such as energy, medicine, military, engineering, computing and electronics. In fact, the military field started early to appreciate the significance of nanotechnology and expects more from it. The field has actually spent a lot of money researching on it than any other field. Despite the good results that have emerged and still expected to emerge as a result of nanotechnology, it has raised other issues of concern which include the potential effects of nanomaterials on the global economy, the impacts of nanomaterials in the environment, its effects on health and other speculative issues (Roco, 2006). Therefore, the advocacy groups and governments have been debating whether it is possible to warrant special regulations on nanotec hnology. This essay discusses the benefits and effects of nanotechnology in military. Nanotechnology has various benefits in the military field. First, nanotechnology helps to create the uniform materials for the soldiers. The idea behind using nanotechnology to make soldier’s uniforms is to make them more comfortable, more lightweight and more high tech. In addition, nanoparticles can be injected on the materials used to make solder’s uniforms to make them more durable, and to protect the soldiers from dangerous effects like high temperatures and chemical effects. The nanoparticles put on the uniform’s material protect soldiers by combining together when a suspicious thing hits the armor hardening the area that is hit. This act of stiffening helps to reduce the impact of that thing that hit or stroke the armor. By lessening the impact force, the soldiers wearing the uniform are protected from the injuries they would have

Pierre-Auguste Renoir - Dance at Bougival Essay

Pierre-Auguste Renoir - Dance at Bougival - Essay Example The essay "Pierre-Auguste Renoir - Dance at Bougival" analyzes Pierre-Auguste Renoir's painting called Dance at Bougival. The â€Å"Dance at Bougivel† painting has two emotions in it, perplexed by the use of different colors and the impressions on the faces of characters present on it. There is a gentleman in a classic-blue old suit and a yellow hat that is holding a lady and they seem to dancing to the tune of a classic song. The man is faces her lady in a romantic way trying to create an impression on her while she does not face him directly. It created a kind of romanticism that is not different from what we know today; the extent a person goes to create an impression to his lover, but she is reluctant to reciprocate her feelings to him until she is sure that she is â€Å"safe†. The two lovers are clad in a manner that suggests that this dance was a special moment for them, a date. One may wonder what was in the mind of Paul Durand-Ruel when he finished this piece of art. Literature reveals that Ruel paid attention to impressionism. He dedicated his art to creating paints which portrayed passion and which, has influenced the modern way of life. During the year 1883, Ruel is said that he used his work to illuminate the experiences he had encountered in romance. His passion for art began when he inherited art gallery that was founded by his parents. Paul Durand-Ruel was born 1831 and died in 1922. Paul developed an interest in painting and he invested in promoting the work of the young artists.

Goldings modern fable Lord of the Flies Essay Example for Free

Goldings modern fable Lord of the Flies Essay What gave Golding the inspiration to write the great novel, Lord of the Flies? He wrote the Lord of the flies novel soon after the war, which was later published in 1954. So it was soon after the war when he wrote it. So was this where his inspiration came from for the novel. Did seeing children suffering give him ideas? Did the Hitler give him inspiration for jack and Churchill for Ralph? Did the war lead him to write the book at all? We dont know now, and probably never will do! But we can guess. We can try and work out what made him write this incredible tale of the children gone savages who fight for survival on the island. The children where being evacuated from the war when they crashed. Ralph was the first character to be introduced. He came out the story to be the strong one. The leader who only wanted the best to come of things and to end it all and get home, just like Winston Churchill wanted to win the war. Jack on the other side, turned out to be more evil, more sadistic and much more savage then Ralph. He was being compared to Hitler or Mussolini. The main evil powers in the Second World War. The conch represents the democracy in the play. It could well be related to the democracy between countries, the vote, the councils and the League of Nations. Golding could well of thought of a symbol that was needed to represent this on the island. The only thing stopping them from tearing each other imp from limp. Just like the rest of the world in the war. The conch was there for peace on the island, and the councils were there to stop the world from destroying one another completely. The fire could well represent a piece of the war of mass destruction. The blitz, for example. It destroyed half of London, like the fire destroyed half the island. Londoners were getting scared the war would never end, after something so bad happened. Golding incorporated this by using it like the boys on the island, seeing this destruction made them realise, this may never end, and they may all die soon. Once they had been there a little while. They began to turn into savages. Ralph knew this wasnt going to end soon. They knew things were going to happen, friends and enemies would be made and it would be along time till it ends. This was the case of the war. Hitler and Churchill knew it was a long-term war and they could be there for years. Golding probably noticed during the war, that people tried to be brave. But beneath the skin, they are truly scared. The people who went off to war, had to be brave, to show those they are confident, that they want to win, to set an example for the people at home and the children. Golding sees this, and puts this into his characters. Everyone on the island was scared, Especially the littluns. Ralph and Jack have to be strong. They are scared, but need to put on a brave face for the sake of everyone. People will breakdown without stronger people to support them like Ralph and jack and the bigguns. Golding has again, related his characters to the human beings that took part in the war. He has compared them, and they basically have the same feelings, just shown in different ways and surroundings. Golding also relates the ending to the war. How d-day is the same as the last bit of the Book. However, Ralph was now related to Hitler and Jack, Churchill. This is because, Jack is winning, and he almost has Ralph, almost has him stuck and almost has the end of Ralph. He has him cornered, when it ends. Just before Ralph is about to be killed it all over. The ordeal they have gone through has ended in 5 minutes. Just like, the last day of the war, When Germany is close to loosing, they surrender, and its all over. I think the early 20th century was a good source for Goldings book, Lord of the Flies. The war was the main thing to happen in the years of Golding writing the book. He saw things first hand and wrote down this in a story, which he changed to make a story, but used the same roots as the war stories. Golding book was a fabulous story of boys, who are stranded, but he hides the fact hat its related to the war well. You dont really notice it, but looking beneath the skin of the book, you actually realise the strong resemblance it has with the war.

Michael Moore :: essays research papers

Michael Moore ‘Michael Moore is one of the most popular but also one of the most feared and hated people in America’. Why is this? Michael Moore is seen by the American society as a representative to the people, or as a public disturbance, expressing the views of an ‘average American’ to the rest of the world, in such mediums as film, text, presentations and interviews. There are many reasons to Michael Moore’s popularity and hate, which all come from his productions and beliefs. The way Moore delivers his information to the society comes in many different forms, and strikes up many different views upon his opinion as well. The views that arise in Michael Moore’s ideas and plans are taken to a higher scale than the ordinary American citizen and people fear Moore will run in politics one day. Some of his words are controversial, others pure fact and some statements are stretched far out of context. Many of Michael’s ideas run through his film, Bowling for Columbine, his multiple press/film conferences and award ceremonies and many interviews with highly ranked people. Focusing on this film, many issues and themes are present from a single movie length feature. Michael Moore raises such issues as violence, crime and killings, but most importantly, gun laws. Michael Moore presents information and facts to the people, because they need to know. Michael strongly believes in this, as many people can see, how Moore mercilessly uses his tricks and taunts to lure out important pieces of information from his interviewees, and making fools of them. With this point, it is one of the main reasons why Michael Moore is one of the most feared or hated people in America. With many different groups having their own opinions upon this man, Michael believes himself to be informing the people about issues he himself would like to know about. And no matter how this information is drawn out, he is there to present it. Throughout his movie ‘Bowling for Columbine’, Michael uses a different variety of ways to present his information to the viewers, including dramatic, humorous, shocking, satirical ways to convey his message.

Law and Morality Essay

Morality can be described as a set of values common to society, which are normative, specifying the correct course of action in a situation and the limits of what society considers acceptable. Law on the other hand according to Osborn’s Concise Law Dictionary is a rule of conduct imposed and reinforced by the sovereign. A body of principles regognized and applied by the state in the administration of justice. If law is to enforce morals, then it is faced with the problem that what one person considers immoral, another might not, so which viewpoint should the law uphold. This can be seen in the case of Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority (1986) where Mrs Gillick sought a declaration that what she saw as an immoral activity (making contraceptive advice and treatment available to girls under the age of consent) was by nature of its immorality, illegal. This was a moral conflict as some saw this as immoral – it encouraged underage sex – others felt it was moral as young girls would engage in underage sex anyway , but contraceptives would prevent unwanted pregnancies. Which viewpoint would the law support. The House of Lords ruled against Mrs Gillick but stated that they were governed by the relevant statutes rather than moral arguments. What then is the relationship between law and morality. What are the differences and similarities The vast differences between existing theories of the basis of law often fail to notice the fact that they are based on the practice of comparing an act to certain standards in order to determine its legality. [1] Different approaches differ in terms of which standards are compared and assessed, though both ultimately assess acts to certain standards to determine their legality or morality. The two leading theories on the topic are positivism and naturalism – the debate between the two has fuelled theorists for centuries. Many observers of positivism presume that it completely dismisses any role of morality in the application of the law, while naturalism bases the existence and validity of law on moral bases. Although the theories are fundamentally different, it is argued that a link between law and morality is glaringly obvious and unavoidable, no matter which side one chooses to follow or favour. This paper will seek to argue that claims which deny any link between law and morality are weak and flawed at best, and apply in a limited manner to simple, straightforward cases. The mere existence of the ‘hard case’ and of court deliberation provides a great deal of evidence for not only the existence of the link between law and morality, but also the necessity of such a link. The naturalist and positivist theories will be explored in order to assess whether the link between law and morality can survive its critics and strengthen the faith of its followers. Legal Positivism Positivists claim that objective morality simply cannot exist because values consist of different attitudes towards and beliefs about certain values. [2] Attitudes and beliefs differ between individuals and cause us to react to a certain act in a subjective manner. Moral perceptions are predominantly emotional, so that such assessments in the realm of the law cause uncertainty and inconsistency. It also fails to recognise difficult cases and the possibility of new cases arising. The apparent main flaw of positivism is that it is unable to explain the legal deliberation which takes place in the courtroom, particularly the difficult cases which have no apparent ‘yes or no’ answer. The very difficulties posed by interpreting the law and applying it to everyday circumstances are unable to be adequately explained by positivism. Indeed, there is a distinction here between hard and soft positivists; the latter do recognise a form of moral basis upon which written laws are perched. Yet both soft and hard positivists are at pains to explain how hard cases arise, in which there is simply no right or wrong answer, and in which morality may unavoidably take a central role. Morality and the Naturalist Approach Naturalists claim that non-legal considerations such as ideological, moral and political factors are not only relevant to the posited law, but that law is also based on such factors. The central argument of naturalism is that objective knowledge of right and wrong can and does exist, and that this provides the basis for legal decisions as well as for the validity of law. Naturalists such as Aquinas[3] claim that natural law provides the basis of validity for posited laws. Rousseau[4] believes that positive law cannot override or entrench upon certain existing natural rights; Aristotle claims that natural justice exists independently of individual perceptions of or opinions on it. [5] Jeremy Bentham proposed utilitarianism where moral action was the one that produced good for many, even it was at the expense of one – the greatest good for the greatest number. John Stuart Mill’s refinement of the idea argues that while this is true the individual should not have to follow society’s morals and should be free to act as they wish provided they do not harm others. The problem arises in defining who are included in others and what is harm. It is clear that naturalist claims to provide a strong link between law and morality, the latter of the two being a basis upon which the former is based. Judges, when they interpret and apply posited law, often make non-legal considerations in order to apply the law effectively. Naturalism, however, has a major flaw in that it claims the existence of objective morality. There are many case examples which suggest otherwise. [6] One presented with two rather extreme and different concepts of the link (or not) between law and morality. Is it plausible that such a links exists? Is there evidence for such a link, and how does it serve to affect how the law is administered? Does there really need to be objective knowledge of right and wrong in order for the link to be maintained? In order to explore these questions, the ever-elusive ‘difficult case’ will be assessed. It will be argued that the link between law and morality is not weakened by the argument that objective knowledge of right and wrong is nonexistent. The debate over the relationship between law and morality came to the forefront in the Hart/Devlin debate which followed the publication of Wolfenden Report in 1957. The report recommended the legalization of prostitution and homosexuality on the particularly untilitarian basis that â€Å"the law should not intervene in the private lives of citizens or seek to enforce an particular pattern of behaiour further than necessary† to protect others. Hart supported the report’s approach stating that legal enforcement of moral code is unnecessary. Devlin on the other hand was strongly opposed to the report. He felt that society had a certain moral standard which law was obliged to uphold as society would fall apart without a common morality. Devlin felt that this morality should be based on the views of the ‘right-minded person’ and that legislature should adhere to three basic principles: (1) Individuals should be allowed as much freedom and privacy as is possible without compromising morality. (2) Parliament and the judiciary should be cautious about changing laws relating to morality and (3) punishment should be used to prevent actions considered abominable to ‘right-minded people’. Hart opposed this view questioning what was ‘right-minded’ and submitted four reasons for not criminalizing what the ‘right-minded person† objected to. (1)Punishment of someone does harm to them only and if their actions involved no one else this was not right. (2) Free will is very moral, so interferance with free will would be immoral, (3) Free will allows learning through experimentation and (4) legislation surpressing an individual’s sexuality will harm them, as it can affect their emotional state. For the majority of legal issues, judges are not required to deviate from posited law and precedent in order to decide. The law makes murder wrong, and it has been a long-standing principle that taking the life of another is morally abhorrent. Yet what of the ‘hard cases’? What if A kills B in self-defence? What if C forced A to kill B else A lose his own life? What if the application of a law is indeterminate? Can posited law be applied without recourse to moral reasoning? Positivists such as Dworkin and Hart differ in their approach. Dworkin claims that there will always be applicable law,[7] while Hart claims that judges can make non-legal considerations under such circumstances. [8] Hart’s theory is applicable to the less open-textured terms where changes made by non-legal considerations are the result of â€Å"resemblances which can reasonably be defended as both legally relevant and sufficiently close. †[9] The judge thus utilises morality as a way of choosing between pre-existent definitions, without devising his own definitions. Although Hart is classed as a positivist, he does acknowledge a â€Å"core of indisputable truth in the doctrines of natural law†[10] which enables law to be based on something more than simply factual considerations. Hart’s theory can be interpreted as recognising a form of natural law, although he does stipulate that having recourse to moral values does not always ensure that law and its application will be just. This assessment of Hart’s approach is plausible, and it serves to create a link between law and morality which avoids the objective criticism of the naturalists. It provides a strong argument for a link between law and morality which is based on interpretational, social considerations which are evident in the courtroom today. It is perhaps necessary to query: does the law define what is right and wrong, or do we determine good and bad independently of the law? There are certainly evident customs in society which have strong influences on the way we behave. Such customs are not implemented by the law or backed by a sanction; they are simply examples of moral codes within a society which exist independently to the law. Does this mean that law and morality have no connection so that the latter can only be found in customs? Does a moral rule backed by the law become a valid law no matter what its content? It is arguable that even majority abhorrence of an act does not make it an immoral act per se, despite the fact that societies need a shared moral outlook in order to exist. [11] It could thus be suggested that the law is simply an embodiment of the current moral outlook of society; like morality the law changes according to attitudes and social tolerance. It is such observations that cause the positivist shunning of the link between law and morality to become less convincing. It is even arguable that the obeying of law is based on the recognition of the moral rule that law should be obeyed; the threat of sanction is evidently not enough to deter some. It could further be argued that the only reason that legislation has authority as law is because of the moral structure of a society. As has already been mentioned, the law develops and evolves according to moral outlooks; this can be seen where laws prohibiting same sex marriages and abortion have been abolished. If the law were completely disconnected from morality, why has it developed and evolved over time? Why does social pressure to repeal or change law often achieve its goal? The Link Between Law and Morality – Evidence Dworkin claims that courts refer to non-legal (moral) standards when deciding hard cases. Assessing and taking into account moral and political considerations has the potential to create a complex web of law and â€Å"justify the network as a whole†. [12] It is strongly arguable that deciding difficult cases without appealing to non-legal considerations is futile – the reason that such cases are ‘hard’ is because the law does not provide enough direction. However, it is important here to stress that decisions are not free to be made according to personal convictions – judges are on the contrary required to carefully weigh social factors in applying and interpreting the law. Dworkin’s theory in this sense is able to escape the positivist criticism that non-legal convictions are ultimately subjective. Rather, the judge is assigned the difficult interpretative task which is seen constantly in court. This is evident in cases such as that of Re A (Conjoined Twins)[13] in which moral judgements were inevitable and necessary in applying the law to the specific circumstances of the case. Ultimately, the judges were faced with the decision of killing one twin in order to save the other, or to not act and cause the death of both twins. While moral judgements are dangerous ground here, a positivist could not argue that the law as it is could be applied simply and without problem – often the law is simply not enough. The law in this case proved of very little aid – how is one to decide whether A’s life has more importance or value than B’s life? While moral considerations could have caused the decision to fall either way, it must be stressed that such situations must risk the dangerous ground created by moral convictions, particularly because the law provides little guidance. Simple cases indeed provide evidence that a link between law and morality is not only non-existent, but also not necessary. [14] Yet the ever-emerging hard cases cry otherwise; they not only highlight the constant shortcomings of posited law, they also emphasise the need to acknowledge and utilise the link between law and morality. Although theorists claim that natural law need not override positive law, except when the two conflict, this serves to strengthen the link between law and morality. If there is no link between law and morality, then how can conflict occur in the first place? Why does public outrage occur when an ‘unjust’ law breaks the boundaries of social tolerance? Those who claim that there is no link between law and morality utilise the naturalist claim to objective morality as their basis for criticism. Yet the term ‘universal morality’ need not apply to the universe as a whole. It is plausible, and certainly does not discredit the naturalist theory, that ‘universality’ or ‘objectivity’ remains as such despite being applied or interpreted differently between societies. Because the universal moral to preserve life may allow the sick to be killed in primitive societies to save sparse resources for the healthy, while requiring that all efforts be made to save every life possible in richer, more able societies. The moral principle – the preservation of life – still remains existent, it is simply expressed and applied differently between societies. [15] Conclusion There are various theories which discuss how law and morality should relate to each other. The current approach by the legal system seem to be that a common morality , based on traditional values should be maintained by the law as exposed by Devlin. Cases such as Shaw v Director of Public Prosecutions (1961) and Knuller v Director of Public Prosecutions ( 1972) made use of the conspiracy to corrupt moral. This had not been done since the 19th century. This was the beginning of the law to attempt to uphold society’s moral values according to Devlin’s doctrine. This approach continued as the more recent case of R v Brown (Anthony) 1992 demonstrates. The defendants had had willingly consented to various sado-masochistic practices and none of them reported it to the police. Yet they were prosecuted and their convictions were upheld by both the House of Lords and The European Court of Human rights, based on public policy to defend the morality of society. Whether or not the law should uphold the moral values of society is still debated. Those who criticise the link between law and morality often rely on the argument that no single opinion of correctness can exist,[16] yet such criticisms presuppose that such a link requires a single notion of correctness or justice. [17] It does not require such a single notion; it merely requires the recognition that legal considerations are often not enough, and that the interpretational practice which takes place is indeed a result of the link between law and morality. To ultimately deny a link between law and morality is to entirely discredit legal precedents, lengthy assessments of judge decisions, and the controversy of many difficult cases. It is also to turn away from the glaringly evident evolutions and changes which have occurred in the legal sphere – to ignore the changing of legal standards according to societal outlooks. Such evidence is difficult to ignore. Upon which other basis does the law stand if it does not reflect the moral tolerances and standards of the society which is subject to it? Bibliography R Alexy, ‘On the Thesis of a Necessary Connection between Law and Morality: Bulygin’s Critique’ (2000) 2 RJ 13, 138-147. T Aquinas, ‘Summa Theologiae’, in Selected Political Writings, JG Dawson (trans), AP D’Entreves (ed) (BB, Oxford 1970). J Bentham, Of Laws in General, HLA Hart (ed) (AP, London 1970a). J Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, JH Burns, HLA Hart (eds) (AP, London 1970b). E Bulygin, ‘Alexy’s Thesis of the Necessary Connection between Law and Morality’ (2002) 2 RJ 13, 133-137. P Devlin, The Enforcement of Morals (OUP, New York 1996). R Dworkin, Law’s Empire (Belknap Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1986). J Finnis, Natural Law and Natural Rights (OUP, New York 1980). HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (CP, Oxford 1961). HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (2nd edn, OCP, Oxford 1994). DD Raphael, Moral Philosophy (OUP, Oxford 1994). R Wacks, Understanding Jurisprudence (OUP, Oxford 2005). ———————– [1] R Wacks, Understanding Jurisprud). ence (OUP, Oxford 2005 [2] DD Raphael, Moral Philosophy (OUP, Oxford 1994) ch. 2. [3] T Aquinas, ‘Summa Theologiae’, in Selected Political Writings, JG Dawson (trans), AP D’Entreves (ed) (BB, Oxford 1970) pt. 2, qu. 94, art. 2. [4] JJ Rousseau, The Social Contract (OUP, Oxford 1762). [5] Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, H Rackham (trans) (William Heineman, London 1938). [6] Corbett v Corbett (1970) 2 WLR 1306 CA per Ormrod LJ. [7] R Dworkin, Law’s Empire (Belknap Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1986) 32-34. [8] HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (2nd edn, OCP, Oxford 1994) 145-147. [9] HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (CP, Oxford 1961) 127. [10] HLA Hart, 1994, op. cit. , 146. [11] P Devlin, The Enforcement of Morals (OUP, New York 1996). [12] R Dworkin, 1986, op. cit. , 245. [13] (2000) 4 All ER 961, (2001) 1 FLR 1 CA. [14] J Finnis, Natural Law and Natural Rights (OUP, New York 1980) 33-34. [15] J Finnis, 1980, op. cit. , 34. [16] E Bulygin, ‘Alexy’s Thesis of the Necessary Connection between Law and Morality’ (2002) 2 RJ 13, 133-137. [17] R Alexy, ‘On the Thesis of a Necessary Connection between Law and Morality: Bulygin’s Critique’ (2000) 2 RJ 13, 138-147.