At the Heart of the Law: Remedies for Massive Wrongs

By Saito, Natsu Taylor | The Review of Litigation, Winter 2008 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

At the Heart of the Law: Remedies for Massive Wrongs

Saito, Natsu Taylor, The Review of Litigation

It was Sir Isaac Newton who said, "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction." Had he been a writer, he might have simply said, "To every action there is a story."

Take [this] story, for instance. It's yours. Do with it what you will. Tell it to friends. Turn it into a television movie. Forget it. But don't say in the years to come that you would have lived your life differently if only you had heard this story. You've heard it now.

Thomas King, The Truth About Stories1

What remedies are most appropriate for large-scale violations of law and human rights? A common response involves deflection away from the law: a strictly legal remedy would be impractical because it would cost too much, or the acts occurred too long ago, or the evidence is unavailable, or the perpetrators and victims are too difficult to identify.2 Therefore, we are told, we must look to political rather than legal solutions. This political focus usually means an acknowledgment of the wrong and, at best, an apology or token monetary compensation. Thus, the discussion of legal remedies is effectively precluded before it has even begun.

As a lawyer, I find this response problematic for many reasons. Most immediately, of course, is its disrespect for the victims of the most egregious conduct, and the incentive thereby created to perpetrate similar wrongs. More fundamentally, it raises questions about the legitimacy of the entire legal project, for a system capable of providing remedies only for minor violations of law, but not massive wrongs, promotes neither justice nor the rule of law.3 Instead, it is a political machine masquerading as law to preserve a status quo that accepts fundamental violations of human rights as inevitable.

My thesis, therefore, is that lawyers have an obligation to analyze large-scale wrongs primarily from a legal, not political or sociological, perspective, and to take seriously both the law itself and the remedial mechanisms it has created, even when the implications of such an approach initially appear overwhelming. The basic principles we take for granted in everyday instances of legal analysis, if they have any legitimacy, should be equally applicable to large cases: Was there a right or a duty?4 Was it violated and, if so, who is responsible? What damage accrued as a result? How can the wrong be rectified?

Preconceptions about the "practicability" of remedies cannot be allowed to preempt the analysis, and the perpetrators of the wrong should not be permitted to decide the outcome. Because this is a short, reflective essay, and because I am most familiar with the United States's history of redress (or lack thereof) for large-scale injustices, I focus here on the approach we have taken within our legal system to racially based violations of U.S. and international law. 5 Much thoughtful scholarly analysis exists, of course, on the various aspects of redress or reparations for race-based wrongs in the United States, and I do not presume to address this broad, indeed overwhelming, subject in any comprehensive manner.6

For purposes of this essay, I assume that there have been fundamental injustices that constituted violations of law-constitutional, international, or both-at the time of their occurrence and that have continuing human consequences. In any particular case, evidence of the wrong at issue must be presented, of course.7 My point is simply that, in such cases, we need to resist the temptation to leapfrog over sound legal analysis to the presumption that only political solutions are viable as a result of an unexamined belief that overwhelming disruptions to the status quo would be entailed by legal remedies of the sort routinely prescribed in smaller cases. I make this argument not because such remedies necessarily need to be implemented in every case, but because I believe that it is only by first making such legal findings that we honestly frame the debate and subsequently arrive at resolutions that-from the perspective of the victims, not just the perpetrators-adequately address the violations at issue and, therefore, preserve the integrity of our legal and political institutions.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

At the Heart of the Law: Remedies for Massive Wrongs


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?