![\"\"](\"https:\/\/impeachreno.org\/politicalhat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/08\/scales-of-justice.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
What happens when the Rule of Law and the Common Good conflict, in that strictly upholding the letter of the law causes a greater harm rather than prevent it, as would be the legitimate aim of the Rule of Law? This question is already addressed with the concept of “necessity” in the Common Law, and to various degrees<\/a> in different jurisdictions, via<\/em> what is often termed the \u201cNecessity<\/a> Defense<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n But this defense of the violation of the strict reading of the law is itself based in the Rule of Law and necessarily limited and generally requiring that the violation of the law, in order to be justified as necessary, must be the alternative to a worse violation of the law.<\/p>\n The same logic could be extended to an official or a member of the military who may need to take actions that exceed their orders or similar situations where failure to take such actions due to exigent circumstances.<\/p>\n But overall these are exception to the rule\u2014not a refutation of the rule itself. If going beyond the limitations of the letter of the law is considered necessary, then it becomes incumbent on the person or persons who did so to nonetheless submit themselves to the law or authorities for judgement. \u00a0 By doing so, one does not elevate themselves above the rules.<\/p>\n What this does not<\/em> do is justify ignoring the Rule of Law over some vague and amorphous \u201cCommon Good\u201d. This is to relegate necessity of diverging from the letter of the law in order to protect the Rule of Law, into a false-dilemma fallacy that relegates the law as merely a suggestion to be superseded according to the whims of whomever can get away with it, or at least try to. An example of this is an attempt to invoke<\/a> Thomas Jefferson to defend putting the \u201cCommon Good\u201d over legal limitations and restrictions, with the specific example being the prosecution of Aaron Burr, who nonetheless was found innocent of Treason because the law, in fact, did prevail<\/a> over Jefferson\u2019s self-serving justification for his own actions.<\/p>\n There is a difference<\/a> between exceeding the authorization of law due to exigent and dire circumstances in wartime or organized armed revolt, and using the purported “common good” as an excuse to rule by arbitrarily and\/or capriciously to subordinate the law itself. Such excuses are the hallmark of the disingenuous Left who justify modern Cultural Marxist ideas of \u201csociety justice\u201d by invoking St. Thomas Aquinas.<\/p>\n This attempt to invoke a false dilemma fallacy of \u201ccommon good\u201d vs<\/em>. the Rule of Law is often combined with a Motte & Bailey defense. The invocation of exigent circumstances or threats so dire as to necessitate acting beyond the scope of law or even against it in limited circumstances is the Motte. The Bailey, however, is a limitless suspension<\/a> of the law, if not abolishment<\/a> of the law itself, for some broader concept of a \u201cgreater good\u201d, with claims of immanent doom being the excuse<\/em> to simply do away with the old and immanentize<\/em> the path to the new and higher law, whatever that may be. \u00a0 Arguments that we are right now in a situation that requires total abandonment of the law to stave off something not only worse but immanent is based in manipulative hyperbole and emotional manipulation.<\/p>\n There is a crucial difference between taking extraordinary steps counter to the strict letter of the law in service thereto, and overturning the law wholesale for the greater good: The former is self-limiting and keeps the rules above the rules, while the later elevates the rulers above the rules. And no, elevating some vague idea like the Volont\u00e9 G\u00e9n\u00e9rale<\/em>, \u201cWe the People\u201d, or even some oracular basis is not a limitation or higher power that must<\/em> be submitted to.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/impeachreno.org\/politicalhat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/quote-all-governments-suffer-a-recurring-problem-power-attracts-pathological-personalities-frank-herbert-86-54-09.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n