代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

Issued rules and standards

2019-01-05 来源: 51due教员组 类别: Paper范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的paper代写范文- Issued rules and standards,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了法律的规则与标准。两种类型的合法命令通过不同的过程给出规则和标准。但关于法律规定应作为规则还是作为标准的问题一直在进行着讨论,这种讨论涉及到每一类别的许多利弊。在权利平等的情况下,标准更有可能成为反对利益的决策基础。

rules and standards,法律的规则与标准,essay代写,paper代写,作业代写

Two types of legal commands are given through different processes – rules and standards. There has been an on-going discussion about whether legal provisions should be formulated as rules or standards, and such discussion has involved many pros and cons on each category.

Advantages of formulating legal provisions as rules

To begin with, a democratic society is built upon the system of law, which requires the rule of law rather than the rule of men. The U.S. Constitution’s due process principle can be interpreted as to require the system of rules over the system of standards, especially in the area of criminal justice where vagueness or unclearness is to be avoided (Sunstein, 1995). 

What is more, one of the obvious advantages of formulating legal provisions as rules is that it can help minimize costs of decision making in certain cases. Rule help set up a frame within which decisions can be made rather easily and quickly, which saves time, effort and social responses.

Moving on, rules enable and promote equality by reducing the inclination of bias and arbitrariness (Sunstein, 1995). By setting up legal provisions as rules, its impersonal characteristics can effectively diminish personal error, ignorance and confusion in the course of law.  In other words, rules are ‘blind’, and it would not decide on any other criteria than the rule itself.

Finally, rules can embolden and constrain decision-makers at the same time (Sunstein, 1995). The reason is that rules set the decision bar before anything happens. With former rules lied before then, judges can go on to make bold but unpopular decisions which the public opposes, as long as the rule applies.

Disadvantages of formulating legal provisions as rules

Rules decide cases before they appear, which composes its key advantage as well as disadvantage. The most obvious disadvantage of formulating law into rules is that good rules are too difficult to make. Rules cannot cover all possible circumstances, and its cost can be very high for lawmakers.

Secondly, rules might be affected by changing circumstances in our society and life. For instance, same sex marriage was not permitted by law in the past, so the rule of law required that marriage was to be done between men and women. However, as our society evolves and circumstances change, same marriage finally has become legal in numerous states.

Thirdly, the abstraction and generality contained in rules might mask bias and lead to uncertain circumstances (Sunstein, 1995). Rules might set up equality for the mass public, but it also sacrifices details for abstraction and generality in order to be applied to more than one case.

Advantages of formulating legal provisions as standards

Firstly, standards are more likely to become the decision basis in the case of equal power regarding opposing interests (Sunstein, 1995). For such kind of cases, the judge might consider whether to decide on rules or standards, and latter seems more ideal when both are taking chances with the lawmaking body.

Secondly, standards are preferred when disagreements appear in remaining issues to be decided (Scalia, 1989). In such cases, there should be a balancing power of involved factors rather than the determiner of law (Scalia, 1989).

Standards also serve well when the judge is facing specific cases that do not fit in with general rules. For instance, if rules can barely apply to a special circumstance that isn’t similarly situated as the usual, the ruling might be uncertain, and outcomes might be biased.

Disadvantages of formulating legal provisions as standards

The fundamental risk of applying standards instead of rules is discretion exercised by the judge. In case-by-case situations, judges might give out decisions containing certain levels of discretion. After all, the key factor in such judging is the judge’s assertions, not the rules of law. The judge might not take all given factors into account and lead to problems of the ruling.

Another disadvantage of standards is the failure of political accountability. Sunstein (1995) gives an example of environmental law, which is based on standards. He pointed out that in such system, no certain party can be given ultimate responsibility for polluted air or excessive clean up costs.

There is one more risk of standards, which is the high cost of decisions compared to that of rules. Ruleless decisions, or decisions made according to standards, might be costing more than we imagine, for the court has to devote much more in its informational and political processes (Sunstein, 1995). 

Counterterrorism Laws – Rules or Standards?

Based on the above, I believe that counterterrorism laws should be designed as rules instead of standards. According to the principles of law, it should be stable, open, and clear, and it should serve the purpose of natural justice and give the courts review powers (Raz, 1979). What is more, crime-preventing agencies cannot pervert the law by its discretion (Raz, 1979). Therefore, if counterterrorism laws aren’t designed as rules, they cannot achieve the above goals and would violate the conformity to the rule of law. In such way, terrorism can be prevented before any actual movements are conducted, and our security is therefore protected. For instance, Posner (2008) believes that the US should set up certain rules when it comes to actions against terrorism. By applying the surveillance technology among terrorists, it can act as a means of deterrence and force them to abandon communications. All of these needs clear boundaries, given by rules instead of standards, to avoid future conflicts of interest and harm of liberty.

Limitations

There are, of course, limitations if all counterterrorism laws are made into rules. The rule of counterterrorism might cause issues including potential bias, unconformity to changing environment, and the diminution of liberty (Waldon, 2003). What is more, some states that such acts reveals the idea to violate the spirit of law and brings unclear benefits (Lizza, 2013). Lizza (2003) thinks that the government should not inspect or collect privacy information without the evidence of crime.

Bibliography

Waldron, J. (2003). Security and Liberty: The Image of Balance. The Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 191–210.

Lizza, R. (2013). Why Won’t Obama Rein in the N.S.A.? The New Yorker. Online. Retrieved from: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/12/16/131216fa_fact_lizza?printable=true&currentPage=all

Sunstein, C.R. (1995). Problems with Rules. California Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 4, pp. 953-1026.

Posner, R.A. (2008). Privacy, Surveillance, and Law. The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol 75, pp. 245-260.

Raz, J. (1979). The Rule of Law and its Virtue. Oxford University Press.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创paper代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的paper代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多paper代写范文 提供作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。

上一篇:The Pursuit of Happiness 下一篇:The Robots