Analyze the following using the Theories of Law: The Case of the Speluncean Explorers was created by Lon Fuller in his article, “The Case of the Speluncean Explorers,” Harvard Law Review, vol. 62, no. 4 (1949) pp. 616-645. The case tells the story of a group of spelunkers (cave-explorers) in the Commonwealth of Newgarth, trapped in a cave by a landslide. As they approach the point of starvation, they make radio contact with the rescue team. Engineers on the team estimate that the rescue will take another 10 days. The men describe their physical condition to physicians at the rescue camp and ask whether they can survive another 10 days without food. The physicians think this very unlikely. Then the spelunkers ask whether they could survive another 10 days if they killed and ate a member of their party. The physicians reluctantly answer that they would. Finally, the men ask whether they ought to hold a lottery to determine whom to kill and eat. No one at the rescue camp is willing to answer this question. The men turn off their radio, and sometime later hold a lottery, kill the loser, and eat him. When they are rescued, they are prosecuted for murder, which in Newgarth carries a mandatory death penalty.
How would judges rule on this situation using the legal theories?
Legal Formalism
Legal Realism
Natural Law
Rational Choice (Law and Economics)
Marxist (Conflict theorist)
Based on the provided case, here’s an analysis of how judges, adhering to different legal theories, would likely rule. Each theory offers a unique perspective on how the law should be interpreted and applied, leading to potentially different outcomes.
A formalist judge would rule that the spelunkers are guilty of murder because the law is clear and must be applied as written. Formalism emphasizes that the law is a self-contained system of rules and principles that should be applied logically and without reference to external factors like morality, social context, or the judge’s personal feelings. The law of Newgarth states that “whoever shall willfully take the life of another shall be punished by death.” The spelunkers willfully killed one of their own.
The judge’s role is to apply this rule mechanically and without exception, regardless of the tragic circumstances. The judge would see their job as simply enforcing the text of the law, not as an arbiter of morality or a problem-solver for society.