Welcome to Westonci.ca, your ultimate destination for finding answers to a wide range of questions from experts. Join our platform to connect with experts ready to provide accurate answers to your questions in various fields. Explore comprehensive solutions to your questions from a wide range of professionals on our user-friendly platform.

Writing an op-ed, explain the different legal theories, and how each justice will rule on the constitutionality of the convictions. Lastly, explain to the readers what will happen after the vote occurs.

Imagine five cave explorers from the Spelunking Society in the year 4300 are trapped in an underground cave after a landslide blocks the entrance. Considerable time and expense are put into a cave rescue effort, which spans more than two weeks and results in the death of ten rescuers. After twenty days in the cave and with diminishing supplies, the group members decide they must kill one of their own to survive. Benjamin Luttrell, one of the group, proposes that they cast dice to determine who should be killed and eaten. After much deliberation and hesitation, the group agrees.

Shortly thereafter, Benjamin gets scared and withdraws from the agreement he had proposed. Nonetheless, the group goes ahead with the plan. When Benjamin refuses to participate, the group goes ahead without him and rolls the dice for him. He loses the dice role. Benjamin is killed and eaten on the twenty third day. The remaining survivors are saved on the thirty second day. Afterward, the remaining group members are put on trial for murder. The statute under which they are tried states, “Whoever shall willfully take the life of another is punished by death.”

Suppose the jury finds all survivors guilty and the trial judge promptly sentences the defendants to death by hanging. After the jury is released from duty, the defendants petition the Supreme Court to reconsider the verdict. Five justices on the Supreme Court review the petition to appeal the murder convictions and death sentences. The legal philosophies of each justice are well known:
• Chief Justice Truxal is a sociological theorist.
• Justice Nelson is a natural theorist.
• Justice Ellis is an economic pragmatist.
• Justice Pinerola is a legal positivist who prefers the “plain meaning” of the statute.
• Justice Cooper is a proponent of critical legal theory.

Sagot :

Based on the given scenario, the likely verdict of the following judges would occur, based on their legal philosophies:

Chief Justice Truxal who is a sociological theorist would uphold the judgment because he would observe the human behavior of the group of trapped men and conclude that though their situation was dire, they committed murder.

Justice Nelson who is a natural theorist would uphold the judgment because he is of the school of thought that believes that human laws are defined by morality and the actions of the men were immoral.

Justice Ellis who is an economic pragmatist would overturn the judgment because he would weigh the situation from an economic perspective and discover that one person needed to die, for the others to survive.

Justice Pinerola who is a legal positivist who prefers the “plain meaning” of the statute would uphold the judgment because he believes that the law and morality are parallel and the men committed murder, plain and simple.

Justice Cooper who is a proponent of critical legal theory would uphold the decision because he believes that the law contains social biases and these biases are the reason for the judicial review on what is a clear murder case.

What is the critical legal theory?

This refers to the theory that states that the law is connected with social issues, and contains social biases.

Hence, we can see that the likely verdict of the following judges would occur, based on their legal philosophies are given above

Read more about the critical legal theory here:

https://brainly.com/question/28195920

#SPJ1