illinois principle

The Illinois Principle

The Illinois Principle is a theory of legal reasoning developed by the American lawyer and scholar Edward H. Levi. The name of the principle references Levis tenure as the President of the University of Illinois, as well as his subsequent career as the United States Attorney General. This principle states that law enforcement must operate within the parameters of the three primary goals of the criminal justice system: the assurance of rights, the provision of social order, and the promotion of justice.

The basics of the Illinois Principle are centered around the belief that law is a moral guide, and should be approached as a system of principles as opposed to simply a collection of rules. Levi argued that legal judgments should be based on the common values of the justice system, not on technical rules or precedent. According to the Illinois Principle, analysis should be based on the same basic principles, regardless of the legal context or the particularities of each case.

The tenets of the Illinois Principle are often broken down into three basic concepts. The first, “the assurance of rights,” holds that all citizens have a fundamental right to be treated with respect and have their rights honored by their government, as well as by society as a whole. This includes both property rights as well as civil, economic, and political entitlements.

The second concept is “the promotion of social order,” which states that government should be allowed to maintain order, prevent future crime and violations of the rights of citizens. This notion holds that laws should be just and effective, meaning they must be clear, reasonable and enforceable.

Finally, the third component is “the promotion of justice,” which holds that justice should be based on fairness, reasonableness and consistency. This component of the Illinois Principle states that those convicted of crimes should be sentenced proportionally to their offense, and that the rights of those accused should be maintained.

These basic tenets of the Illinois Principle underlie a great deal of American law and legal precedent today. For example, the exclusionary rule, which holds illegal evidence obtained by law enforcement inadmissible, is a result of the Illinois Principles insistence on ensuring the rights of citizens. The principles influence is also evident in a number of legal decisions involving civil rights and the legal protection of minorities in the United States.

The Illinois Principle has been criticized as being somewhat vague, in that it does not provide concrete methods or means to enforce or implement its concepts. In this way, the Illinois Principle serves more as a morality guide to legal interpretation, rather than a firm basis for legal precept. However, this perhaps makes it even more pertinent today, particularly in the field of criminal law, where the number of rules and regulations has grown exponentially in recent decades. The Illinois Principles insistence that the law should be guided by principles of fairness and justice as opposed to technical rules provides a useful reminder for legislators and attorneys alike.

The Illinois Rule, or the assumed duty to rescue, is the idea that an individual has a moral or legal obligation to assist a person who is in danger physically or otherwise. This rule is based on the moral principle that people are responsible to care for their fellow human beings.

The Illinois Rule was introduced in the 1968 case of Irons v. Bender, where it was held that a person has an obligation to attempt to rescue an endangered person if they could do so without creating harm, either to themselves or the person they are attempting to rescue. The implication was that a rescue attempt may be required in all areas of life, regardless of the individual’s relationship to the endangered person.

The line between legal obligation and moral obligation is present in the Illinois Rule. Although the court may not be able to compel someone to commit an act of heroism, there may exist moral pressure to attempt to rescue a person in need. Depending upon the individual’s attitude, this potential pressure may be enough to cause a person to attempt a rescue, even if they may be putting their own safety at risk.

While there is debate as to whether or not it is wise to ever attempt to rescue a person or animal in a risky situation, many people agree that the spirit of altruism that is represented in the Illinois Rule should be nourished and respected. Respect for the wellbeing of others is an important trait for all individuals, and any instance where a person’s actions reflect this should be encouraged.