Judge as Conscientious Objector – Analysis Based on Cultural Exemptions Theory and U.S. Law

Szymon Mazurkiewicz

doi:10.21697/priel.2017.6.1.03

Published: 2018-09-04

Vol. 6 No. 1 (2017)

Judge as Conscientious Objector – Analysis Based on Cultural Exemptions Theory and U.S. Law

Szymon Mazurkiewicz

Polish Review of International and European Law

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.21697/priel.2017.6.1.03

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze whether it is possible for a judge to possess the right to conscientious objection. Firstly, the author provides some conceptual remarks along with distinguishing conscientious objection from other situations concerning conflict between law and morality that involve judges. Next, cultural exemptions/religious accommodations theory is introduced as a conceptual basis for further analysis. W. Ciszewski’s multidimensional view on exemption theory is applied here. It distinguishes three levels of discussion: the general legitimatization of accommodations, secondly, the justification of a concrete exemption and thirdly the scope, process of application and exclusions of the specific exemption. This paper involves the second level and some issues from the third. Five premises given by W. Ciszewski are considered: (1) significance of a goal realized by regulation, (2) formal amenability of a duty to exclusion, (3) significance of one’s world view being in conflict with duty, (4) prohibition of the unjustified privileging of a group and (5) size of a group that may obtain an exemption. The last part involves the problem of applying a conscience clause. In the paper the author analyzes whether the regulation of judicial disqualification, especially judicial recusal, can be regarded as a legal basis for taking advantage of conscientious objection. The author also considers the boundaries of the clause of conscience with special emphasize on the individual’s right to a fair trial.

Keywords:

conscience clause of a judge, conscientious objection, exemption theory, judicial disqualification, judicial bias, right to fair trial

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Mazurkiewicz, S. (2018). Judge as Conscientious Objector – Analysis Based on Cultural Exemptions Theory and U.S. Law. Polish Review of International and European Law, 6(1), 73–98. https://doi.org/10.21697/priel.2017.6.1.03

Cited by / Share

References

Ban D., Making Appearances Matter: Recusal and the Appearance of Bias, ‘BYU Law Review’ 2011, vol. 2011, no. 4.
Google Scholar

Barrett A., Garvey J., Catholic Judges in Capital Cases, ‘Notre Dame Law School Scholarly Workshop’ 1998, Paper 527.
Google Scholar

Bloom S., Judicial Bias and Financial Interest as Grounds for Disqualification of Federal Judges, ‘Case Western Reserve Law Review’ 1980, vol. 35, no. 4.
Google Scholar

Bou-Habib P., A Theory of Religious Accommodation, ‘Journal of Applied Philosophy’ 2006, vol. 23, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2006.00323.x
Google Scholar

Burkhardt G., Idaho v. Freeman – Judicial Disqualification: The Effect of Religious Leadership on Judicial Impartiality, ‘The John Marshall Law Review’ 1980, vol. 14, no. 1.
Google Scholar

Ciszewski W., Wyłączenia światopoglądowe jako przedmiot dyskusji teoretycznej – próba systematyzacji, ‘Forum Prawnicze’ 2016, vol. 34, no. 2.
Google Scholar

Collins M., Conscience Clause and Oral Contraceptives: Conscientious Objection or Calculated Obstruction?, ‘Annals of Health Law’ 2006, vol. 15, no. 1.
Google Scholar

Dubinsky P. R., International Law in the Legal System of United States, ‘The American Journal of Comparative Law’, vol. 58, Supplement: DOI: https://doi.org/10.5131/ajcl.2009.0020
Google Scholar

Welcoming the World: U. S. National Reports to the XVIIIth International Congress of Comparative Law 2010.
Google Scholar

Dworkin R., Taking Rights Seriously, Harvard University Press, London 1977.
Google Scholar

Flynn D., Pharmacists conscience clause and access to oral contraceptives, ‘Journal of Medical Ethics’ 2009, vol. 34, no. 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2007.021337
Google Scholar

Humphrey J. P., The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Its History, Impact and Juridical Character [in:], B. G. Ramcharan (ed.), ‘Human Rights: Thirty Years After the Universal Declaration’, Kluwer, The Hague-Boston-London 1979.
Google Scholar

Jones M., Religiously Devout Judges: A Decision-Making Framework for Judicial Disqualification, ‘Indiana Law Journal’ 2013, vol. 88, no. 3.
Google Scholar

Levy J., The Multiculturalism of Fear, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297122.001.0001
Google Scholar

Miller J., The Unconscionability of Conscience Clause: Pharmacists’ Conscience and Women’s Access to Contraception, ‘Health Matrix: The Journal of Law-Medicine’ 2006, vol. 16, no. 1.
Google Scholar

Nugent D., Judicial Bias, ‘Cleveland State Law Review’ 1994, vol. 42 no. 1.
Google Scholar

Postema G., Legal Philosophy in the Twentieth Century: The Common Law World, ‘A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence’, vol.11, Springer, Dodrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York 2011.
Google Scholar

Quong J., Cultural Exemptions, Expansive Tastes and Equal Opportunities, ‘Journal of Applied Philosophy’ 2006, vol. 23, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2006.00320.x
Google Scholar

Stempel J., Chief William’s Ghost: The Problematic Persistence of the Duty to Sit Doctrine, ‘Scholarly Works’ 2009, Paper 232.
Google Scholar

Vallier K., The Moral Basis of Religious Exemptions, ‘Law and Philosophy’ 2016, vol. 35, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-015-9246-9
Google Scholar

Waldron J., One Law for All? The Logic of Cultural Accommodation, ‘Washington and Lee Law Review’ 2002, vol. 59, no. 1.
Google Scholar

Zajadło J., Nieposłuszeństwo sędziowskie, ‘Państwo i Prawo’, 2016, no. 1
Google Scholar