American obedience is pledged to legal process, not to persons

Evidence

Legal process, in a sense, rushes in to fill a vacuum of authority. “Law” has in many ways replaced other forms of authority. In the colonial period, officials swore to be loyal to their king; they had a personal bond to the crown. The president of the United States, however, takes an oath to support the Constitution. His “king” is a legal document, a symbol of law, rather than any human authority. In this country, ultimate power is sup­ posed to rest with the people; more concretely, it lies in the legal structure of society, and in the laws themselves. We pledge allegiance to the flag, but true allegiance runs not to a piece of cloth, or even to the president, or to some sacred text in the National Archives. Rather, our commitment is to a way of governing, a process, a set of procedures, a way of making decisions—​in other words, to law. — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 1440

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Law is not reducible to commands backed by sovereign force — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 826; Legal obligation differs from mere coercion by threat of force — Ronald M. Dworkin, The Model of Rules, 40; Legal validity derives from normative authority, not from physical power alone. — Ronald M. Dworkin, The Model of Rules, 48 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Legal validity derives from normative authority, not from physical power alone. #corroborates (0.85) — Ronald M. Dworkin, The Model of Rules, 48
• Legal obligation differs from mere coercion by threat of force #corroborates (0.82) — Ronald M. Dworkin, The Model of Rules, 40
• Law is not reducible to commands backed by sovereign force #expands (0.80) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 826
• Duty-driven obedience, not personality, predicts cruelty under authority #corroborates (0.78) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 434