Law, Justice, and the Role of Rules: From the Supreme Court to the Sports Field

Legal Record and Professional Consequences

• Impact on Law School Admissions and Career Planning:

  • Having a DUI (Driving Under the Influence) or other criminal offenses can remain on a person's record for years, affecting events such as applying to law school.
  • Professional organizations and licensing boards, particularly in law, conduct a character and fitness review.
  • Key areas of concern in these reviews include:
  • Criminal convictions.
  • Academic dishonesty problems.
  • Allegations or findings of sexual harassment.

• The Lawyer's Perspective vs. The Client's Experience:

  • For lawyers (especially those specializing in DUIs, often seen on billboards like "1-800-DUI-DUI"), these cases are routine.
  • A docket is a list of cases; a lawyer may represent three or four people before a judge in a single session as a totally routine part of their job.
  • Lawyers work to earn a living; even in a profession they love, most work to pay bills and might not continue sixty hours a week if they won the lottery.
  • For the client, the experience is radically different. Most clients come to a lawyer on the "worst day of their life."
  • Situations for clients often involve extreme distress: being arrested, facing the bankruptcy of a family farm, or experiencing a breach of contract involving a significant amount of money.
  • Clients not only face the stress of a major problem but also the burden of paying a lawyer to fix it.

Equal Justice Under Law: The US Supreme Court Motto

• Symbolism and Accessibility:

  • Equal Justice Under Law is the motto inscribed above the front door of the United States Supreme Court.
  • For approximately $75$ years after the building was constructed, visitors entered by walking up the marble steps and through the main front doors.
  • Approximately $20$ years ago, a renovation changed the entrance process. Now, everyone enters through the basement and passes through security scanning machines (similar to TSA scanners).
  • The Dissenting Justices: This change was so controversial that three justices wrote a formal written dissent. They argued it was symbolically important for the public to enter under the motto itself.

• Interpretations of the Motto:

  • A student named Willow interpreted the motto to mean that everyone has the same rules to follow and the same repercussions for breaking those rules.
  • Pedagogically, the lecturer uses this phrase to teach Torts (the study of injuries to a person or their property, such as car accidents or medical malpractice).
  • The lecturer notes that the phrase features two distinct concepts: Justice and Law. These are often conflated, but the phrase suggests they are different.
  • Sentence Structure Analysis: In the phrase "Equal Justice Under Law," the word "Law" comes first hierarchically because justice is described as being under law.
  • This suggests that the path to justice is through the application of the law.
  • A potential critique of this hierarchy: Law is created by people in power. Consequently, those not in power may feel they are not receiving justice because they do not like the laws established by those in power.

The Debate: Law vs. Justice in the Legal Profession

• Ministers of Justice:

  • A law school mural features an inscription stating that law students are fitting themselves to be "ministers of justice," suggesting a lawyer's primary job is to achieve justice.
  • This creates a tension with the motto "Equal Justice Under Law," which prioritizes the law.

• Learned Hand vs. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.:

  • Hand and Holmes were best friends and highly influential legal figures.
  • When Holmes was nominated to the Supreme Court, Hand told him: "Do justice, sir."
  • Holmes responded: "That is not my job. My job is to apply the law."
  • This debate remains central to modern discussions about the United States Supreme Court and whether their role is to achieve a just outcome or strictly apply legal rules.

The Function of Rules in Sports

• Defining the Game:

  • Rules define what a sport is. Without rules like yellow cards for dangerous play in soccer, the game would no longer be soccer; it might be dodgeball or something else.
  • Competitive players (like Vishal in soccer or Maya in field hockey) rely on these rules for the structure of the game.

• Safety and Fairness:

  • Rules often exist for safety (e.g., face mask penalties in football to prevent injury, fouls in soccer for body-checking).
  • Officials (referees/umpires) are expected to be impartial and treat all teams equally, regardless of personal feelings about a player's skill or scholarship potential.

• Knowledge of the Rules:

  • Players often learn the rules instinctively from the time they are small children (peewees).
  • It is considered unfair to make up a rule during a game (e.g., giving a yellow card for kicking with the toes instead of the side of the foot if that rule didn't previously exist).
  • An "even playing field" requires everyone to know what the rules are ahead of time.

Case Study: The 2004 Athens Olympics Gymnastics Controversy

• Background on Gymnastics Scoring:

  • In $2004$, scoring involved a "perfect $10$" scale.
  • Points were based on a start value (difficulty). A difficult routine might start at a $10$, while a simpler one might start at a $9.7$ or $9.8$.
  • Start values were displayed on digital screens beside the apparatus (e.g., parallel bars, vault, rings) for coaches, gymnasts, and spectators to see.

• The Rule of Protest:

  • A rule allowed gymnasts to protest their scores if they thought the judges were wrong.
  • However, the protest had to occur before the gymnast moved to the next station in the rotation. Once the rotation moved forward, the opportunity to protest was lost.
  • This rule exists because judges cannot be expected to remember the minute details of an earlier routine after seeing many other gymnasts.

• The Incident:

  • American gymnast Paul Honk and South Korean gymnast mister Yang (also referred to as Mr. Geng) were the primary competitors.
  • The judges made a mistake and gave mister Yang a start value of $9.9$ instead of the correct $10$.
  • This $0.1$ difference was the gap between a gold medal and a bronze medal.

• The Dispute:

  • Because the protest was not made in time, the results stood. Paul Honk kept the gold medal, even though mister Yang technically had the better performance.
  • Student Yazan argued that Paul Honk should keep the medal because the rule regarding timing existed and was known to everyone.
  • Public Reaction: Paul Honk was largely vilified by the American public as a "bad sport." People wanted him to give the medal to mister Yang. Wheaties even refused to put his picture on their cereal box.
  • Significance: The Olympic Committee upheld the rule, arguing that making an exception would lead to a slippery slope. The philosophical question is whether it is more fair to follow rules consistently or to make exceptions in the name of justice.

Case Study: The Armando Galarraga "Nearly Perfect Game"

• The Perfect Game in Baseball:

  • A perfect game occurs when a pitcher prevents any batter from reaching a base (no hits, no walks, no errors) over nine innings ($27$ consecutive outs).
  • This is an incredibly rare achievement in baseball history.

• The 2010 Incident:

  • Armando Galarraga was one out away from a perfect game.
  • The final batter hit a routine ball; Galarraga covered first base, caught the ball, and touched the base (the "bag") before the runner reached it.
  • The umpire, Jim Joyce, mistakenly called the runner "safe."
  • At the time, the rules of baseball stated that an umpire's call was final and could not be overturned by instant replay.

• The Fallout:

  • Video evidence clearly showed the runner was out, but because of the rule, the perfect game was lost.
  • The umpire was devastated afterward upon seeing the replay. This case highlights the same tension between strict rule adherence and the pursuit of a "just" outcome when the rules produce an errorsoneous result.

Questions & Discussion

• Question: What is a perfect game?
• Response (Alwyn/Lincoln): No hits, no walks. They strike every single batter out (or they are put out through fielding). It requires nine innings of three outs each.
• Discussion on Fairness (Maya/Vishal): The group discussed whether it is fair for a time limit to exist on a protest in gymnastics, or whether a bad call by a referee should be allowed to stand if the truth is discovered later. Most agreed that while it feels "unjust," the consistency of the rules is what allows the game to function at all.