Courts sanction perceived moral character rather than the formal legal charge.
Evidence
Court personnel attach expectations of moral behavior to particular formal offenses so that if the moral content of an offense is more or less than expected for the charge, the charge may be changed even though it accurately describes the conduct in question. … It would seem that judges meted SaBctions for the behavior and not the formal charge. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 823
Categorization
- XREF: Links to the reader’s interest in bureaucratic discretion as the site where stereotypes override formal categories — here the formal charge is bent to fit the stereotype. — connects to: Courts may not let moral condemnation override their limited institutional role — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 1774; Courts won’t punish or reward either side based on moral fault like affairs — Infidelity and Divorce in California: What It Really Means for Your Case; Courts punish qualities hidden behind acts, not just the acts themselves — Michel Foucault, Discipline & Punish- The Birth of the…, 58 (+3 more)
- DEFINE: Illustrates ‘moral content’ expectations: an implicit typology courts use to classify defendants.
Broader Connections
- Courts may not let moral condemnation override their limited institutional role
#complicates(0.85) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 1774 - Courts punish qualities hidden behind acts, not just the acts themselves
#expands(0.85) — Michel Foucault, Discipline & Punish- The Birth of the…, 58 - Legal authority depends on culturally interpreted moral categories
#expands(0.85) - Judges must justify rulings through legal reasoning rather than personal preference or popular will.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2437 - Judicial role orientations can override a judge’s personal moral beliefs.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2595