SAM MICHAELS
<Contributor>
With only two weeks of law school behind me, and the recoil of this seemingly monumental career leap still reverberating, I thought now would be a good time to take a stab at the question which has so clearly dominated my time at Osgoode so far. What is law? Every speech, every presentation, and every professor’s introduction included some iteration of this question. The issue was broken down, analyzed, deliberated, and defined, with reference to every philosophy on the matter, and the full history of the debate. My understanding of the question has grown immensely, and my appreciation for the advice and instruction offered so far knows no bounds.
However, something in all these talks has left me troubled, which is why I am writing this now.
For all the depth we reached on the question “what is law,” every speaker I heard still seemed horribly afraid to offer anything close to what could be considered an answer. Why is this? Are we worried about the shame of a bad response, or the inevitable debate any ideological answer will lead to? I’m not sure. And perhaps it is this lack of surety that leaves me so confident to tackle the question for myself. As of now, I am on the ground floor of the legal profession. I have neither the knowledge nor experience to know how wrong my answer will be. Which is why I will put it out there now, to be torn apart by myself and others as I learn and grow through my time here. It is my hope that from reading what I have to say, minds much better than my own will find a renewed confidence in taking their own turn to say what is law.
So, what is law? Law is the rules of the house. And the house is society. Not just “our” society (or the Oz society we are all currently lost in), but all of society. We are already seeing international law growing as we formulate rules for the whole house, but if you a staunch nationalist, at least you can hopefully picture each country as its own room. Some of the rooms have more furniture, some are sturdier, some are prettier, but all are part of the same building. The rules of each room, whether it is noticeable or not, will affect all the others. Now some of the rules are easy to know. Your house needs walls, floors, and ceilings. Society’s house needs to not kill each other, be in general agreeable in public, and not steal from each other. At this point you may stop me to mention any of the million cases where killing is acceptable, or when stealing is forgivable. I can only respond that all I said was that we need walls, but not how they should look or what material they should be. These are more detailed rules, they need to be arrived at slowly, with delicacy and dedication.
Just like with the rooms of a house, each country has its own benefits and, ideally, its own purpose. For countries, that purpose should be the well-being of its people, and as such, the law needs to be designed towards that aim. As we get into more complex situations, just as we get into the minute details of how our home should be organized, the law needs to respond with more complexity. It is easy to know that child molestation is bad for society’s house. In my house, it is easy to know that the bed shouldn’t go in front of the door. But what of an issue such as tobacco control? Here it gets complicated, and like the very tiny details of how I organize my home, whether to stack the pots on the pans or to leave the towels hanging or folded, it will take much more effort to arrive at the right answer. Whether that answer is out there, or whether I will have to use the information and evidence to arrive at the best possible rule, it doesn’t mean the effort is not worthwhile.
This is how I see all of law. It is the rules of the house that will keep things organized and running smoothly. Because society is one heck of a complicated house, it’s simply taking us a while to arrive at all the correct rules, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth the effort! If we see society as a house, one in which the contents and rules of my room affect all the others, than we are far more likely to be careful with how we treat our sovereign space. Seeing law as the rules of the house allows us to view law as an active, organizing force in our lives. In this way we can see ourselves, as lawyers, as responsible for making good, workable rules, ones which will help not only to maintain our home, but to ensure that it is strong and beautiful for all the future generations that will come to live within its walls.
Though it is feels quite fulfilling to finally pair the what is law question with an answer, I already know I am wrong. It is a question I couldn’t possibly hope to answer correctly, but that doesn’t mean I feel it was an invalid effort. Rather, all I was hoping to do was break from the tradition of non-answers, to show that you can say something concrete, whether right or wrong, and find some value in that solidity.
I feel “what is law” is a question that every one of my peers should have an answer to. Wherever you go in your legal career, the overarching power of the law will control and curb your progress. It is an inevitability we must face, and the only weapon we will have to deal with these limitations will be knowledge. Only through understanding the law can we hope to help it grow, and only through knowing what law is can we truly understand it. The task if far from complete, but hopefully, agree or not with my assessment, this text has provided at least a potential place to start.