Legal Rights to Do Wrong

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What does the term 'legal right to do legal wrong' imply?

A right that promotes social justice.

A right to perform actions that are against the law.

A right that guarantees ethical behavior.

A right against interference with wrongdoing. (correct)

Which of the following best describes the legal right mentioned?

A right that ensures compliance with moral standards.

A right to evade legal duties without consequences.

A right that protects individuals from legal enforcement of duties. (correct)

A right that allows individuals to commit any act without accountability.

What example is provided to support the concept of a legal right to do legal wrong?

Doctrine of diplomatic immunity. (correct)

Right to due process.

Right to free speech.

Right to privacy.

How does the author view the coherence of 'legal right to do legal wrong'?

It is conceptually coherent and normatively significant. Signup and view all the answers

What is one common skepticism surrounding the idea of a legal right to do legal wrong?

It contradicts the essence of legal rights. Signup and view all the answers

What key feature is necessary for the concept of 'legal rights to do wrong' to be valid?

Clarity in parameters and features. Signup and view all the answers

How does the author justify some legal rights to do legal wrong as valuable?

By providing practical cases where they apply beneficially. Signup and view all the answers

In what context is the right to do wrong considered valuable?

In diplomatic or international relations. Signup and view all the answers

What does the term 'right to do wrong' imply in the context of law?

An exemption from legal obligations within certain doctrines Signup and view all the answers

Which concept allows for the existence of a right to do what the law forbids?

'Positive law' as a principle of legal reasoning Signup and view all the answers

In legal terminology, what is suggested by the phrase 'immunity from liability'?

Protection from being held accountable for legal duties Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is indicative of a holder of a right to do wrong?

They hold a right against interference from others Signup and view all the answers

Which term is closely associated with the concept of a right to do wrong?

Legal entitlement Signup and view all the answers

What contributes to the conceptual coherence of rights to do legal wrongs?

The presence of doctrines that allow such rights Signup and view all the answers

According to the discussed legal perspectives, when can rights to do wrong be seen as beneficial?

In the context of specific legal doctrines Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following demonstrates a potential misconception about legal rights to do wrong?

They are always enforced by law. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

A Legal Right to Do Legal Wrong

The article argues that legal rights to do legal wrong are conceptually coherent
Legal rights to violate legal duty are found within positive law doctrines, and can be beneficial
The rights holder enjoys a right against interference with their wrongdoing
The category of legal right to do legal wrong coheres with concepts of right and legality
Examples exist in diplomatic immunity
Immunity from liability for duty violation is another coherent type of right to do wrong.
Diplomatic immunity protects diplomats from legal actions in the host country
Diplomatic immunity is a legal right to violate legal duties
Moral right to do legal wrong (e.g., civil disobedience)
Legal right to do moral wrong (e.g., refusal to perform an easy rescue)
Moral right to do moral wrong (e.g., abortion)
Legal rights to do legal wrong represent a legal right against enforcement or interference by others.
The article argues that legal rights to do wrong are conceptually coherent.

Preliminary Clarifications

A legal right to do legal wrong entails a norm of non-interference, not just freedom to do wrong
Legal right to do legal wrong does not permit wrongdoing; it protects it from enforcement
Rights to do wrong do not necessarily imply the rightness of the action
Rights are meant to protect interests and choices of right-holders rather than justifying them
Rights exist in various normative systems including law, morality and socialization.

Legal Rights to Do Legal Wrong, Claim-Rights and Immunities

Some legal doctrines take the form of legal claim rights e.g., property rights, or immunity.
A claim right is a right against interference and has a correlative duty on others
Immunity (a power right) entails freedom from alteration from others
The article shows that legal rights to do wrong are conceptually coherent
Immunity can exist without privileges, thus showing rights to do legal wrong can exist independently
The article gives examples of legal rights to do wrong, including diplomatic immunity and non-prosecution agreements, and provides legal defences for wrongdoing.
Immunities are rights against interference with wrongdoing, and can provide additional freedom beyond what would otherwise be available in a system

Government Estoppel

Government estoppel holds governments to the representation of their agents
Four elements are needed for estoppel: knowledge of the facts, intent in acting, ignorance of facts, and reliance causing injury
Estoppel grants a legal right to do legal wrong through a right to enjoin government interference
Estoppel does not necessarily negate the underlying duty.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

This article explores the complex concept of legal rights that allow individuals to engage in actions considered legally wrong. It highlights examples such as diplomatic immunity and discusses the implications of these rights in relation to moral obligations. The text presents a nuanced understanding of how legal rights can sometimes conflict with ethical duties.