Official Misrepresentations of the Law and Fairness. Babb, M. & Emmerich, L. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 17(1):83 – 109, 2023. Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media B.V. Type: Article![Official Misrepresentations of the Law and Fairness [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex An official misrepresentation of the law occurs when an official, acting as an agent of the state, represents what is legal or not in an erroneous or misleading way. Should reliance on such misrepresentations excuse one from criminal responsibility? American courts presently recognize two official misrepresentation defenses: Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes these defenses and what their limits are. Part of the confusion surrounds why these defenses are justified at all, especially given the general principle ignorantia juris non excusat. We propose an answer to this justification question: these defenses are justified because official misrepresentations preclude knowledge of the illegality of the acts in question. It is not simply that someone on the receiving end did not know; they could not know. We develop this account, linking it to due process and fairness, and then use it to clarify Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority and argue both should be subject to important restrictions. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.
@article{babb_official_2023,
title = {Official {Misrepresentations} of the {Law} and {Fairness}},
volume = {17},
issn = {18719791},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85111112076&doi=10.1007%2fs11572-021-09596-3&partnerID=40&md5=84a07b14532d9c0d9c39cef44252cda5},
doi = {10.1007/s11572-021-09596-3},
abstract = {An official misrepresentation of the law occurs when an official, acting as an agent of the state, represents what is legal or not in an erroneous or misleading way. Should reliance on such misrepresentations excuse one from criminal responsibility? American courts presently recognize two official misrepresentation defenses: Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes these defenses and what their limits are. Part of the confusion surrounds why these defenses are justified at all, especially given the general principle ignorantia juris non excusat. We propose an answer to this justification question: these defenses are justified because official misrepresentations preclude knowledge of the illegality of the acts in question. It is not simply that someone on the receiving end did not know; they could not know. We develop this account, linking it to due process and fairness, and then use it to clarify Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority and argue both should be subject to important restrictions. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.},
language = {English},
number = {1},
journal = {Criminal Law and Philosophy},
author = {Babb, Matthew and Emmerich, Lauren},
year = {2023},
note = {Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
Type: Article},
pages = {83 -- 109},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"e2mThmrtFM6jjFMsg","bibbaseid":"babb-emmerich-officialmisrepresentationsofthelawandfairness-2023","author_short":["Babb, M.","Emmerich, L."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Official Misrepresentations of the Law and Fairness","volume":"17","issn":"18719791","url":"https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85111112076&doi=10.1007%2fs11572-021-09596-3&partnerID=40&md5=84a07b14532d9c0d9c39cef44252cda5","doi":"10.1007/s11572-021-09596-3","abstract":"An official misrepresentation of the law occurs when an official, acting as an agent of the state, represents what is legal or not in an erroneous or misleading way. Should reliance on such misrepresentations excuse one from criminal responsibility? American courts presently recognize two official misrepresentation defenses: Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes these defenses and what their limits are. Part of the confusion surrounds why these defenses are justified at all, especially given the general principle ignorantia juris non excusat. We propose an answer to this justification question: these defenses are justified because official misrepresentations preclude knowledge of the illegality of the acts in question. It is not simply that someone on the receiving end did not know; they could not know. We develop this account, linking it to due process and fairness, and then use it to clarify Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority and argue both should be subject to important restrictions. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.","language":"English","number":"1","journal":"Criminal Law and Philosophy","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Babb"],"firstnames":["Matthew"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Emmerich"],"firstnames":["Lauren"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2023","note":"Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media B.V. Type: Article","pages":"83 – 109","bibtex":"@article{babb_official_2023,\n\ttitle = {Official {Misrepresentations} of the {Law} and {Fairness}},\n\tvolume = {17},\n\tissn = {18719791},\n\turl = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85111112076&doi=10.1007%2fs11572-021-09596-3&partnerID=40&md5=84a07b14532d9c0d9c39cef44252cda5},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s11572-021-09596-3},\n\tabstract = {An official misrepresentation of the law occurs when an official, acting as an agent of the state, represents what is legal or not in an erroneous or misleading way. Should reliance on such misrepresentations excuse one from criminal responsibility? American courts presently recognize two official misrepresentation defenses: Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes these defenses and what their limits are. Part of the confusion surrounds why these defenses are justified at all, especially given the general principle ignorantia juris non excusat. We propose an answer to this justification question: these defenses are justified because official misrepresentations preclude knowledge of the illegality of the acts in question. It is not simply that someone on the receiving end did not know; they could not know. We develop this account, linking it to due process and fairness, and then use it to clarify Entrapment by Estoppel and Public Authority and argue both should be subject to important restrictions. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.},\n\tlanguage = {English},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\tjournal = {Criminal Law and Philosophy},\n\tauthor = {Babb, Matthew and Emmerich, Lauren},\n\tyear = {2023},\n\tnote = {Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media B.V.\nType: Article},\n\tpages = {83 -- 109},\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Babb, M.","Emmerich, L."],"key":"babb_official_2023","id":"babb_official_2023","bibbaseid":"babb-emmerich-officialmisrepresentationsofthelawandfairness-2023","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85111112076&doi=10.1007%2fs11572-021-09596-3&partnerID=40&md5=84a07b14532d9c0d9c39cef44252cda5"},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero-group/science_et_ignorance/1340424","dataSources":["zX4acseCDM6D58AW7"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["official","misrepresentations","law","fairness","babb","emmerich"],"title":"Official Misrepresentations of the Law and Fairness","year":2023}