法律英语：85 Ignorance is no Excuse（在线收听）

by Michael W. Flynn
 
First, a disclaimer: Although I am an attorney, the legal information in this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for seeking personalized legal advice from an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Further, I do not intend to create an attorney-client relationship with any listener.

Today I discuss a rather annoying but effective rule of law: ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Bryan and Luke independently wrote on the same day the following questions:

Let's pretend that I grew up in the backwoods of Kentucky, and upon moving into civilization wanted to learn all the laws I need to abide by. Where could I go to find them all? And given that many are written using legal jargon, how would I understand them when I finally did read them? How can such a complicated system be considered just and fair?

and

We all know that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” but what obligation does a law-making body have to make changes to the law public knowledge so that the general public is not ignorant?

This maxim published in Roman law, “ignorantia legis non excusat,” provided the basis for this notion in modern civil and common law. It translates directly as “ignorance of the law does not excuse.”

To read all the laws that apply to you, you can visit a local law library to read the published federal, state, county and municipal laws that are on the books. Also, most jurisdictions publish online for easier access. These law libraries also publish the cases that interpret the laws. Sounds fun, right?! I know I want to spend my Saturday reading the Civil Code.

And yes, most laws are written in completely inaccessible legal jargon, or cross reference each other so many times you need a chart to even start to understand what you are responsible for knowing. Attorneys who have been through the hell that is law school, the bar exam, etc., need help figuring out areas of the law with which they are not familiar.

So, why is it fair and just for the state to assume and require all people to know its laws, and punish people for failing to abide by laws that even trained attorneys have difficulty reading?

The rationale for this rule is that a person could easily escape criminal or civil liability by simply claiming that he did not know about the law he broke. Early scholars reasoned that, in order to maintain order, the state must have the ability to enforce its laws against anyone entering its jurisdiction, even for a short period of time. If not, then both citizens and foreigners could flout the law, and the state would be impotent in keeping the peace and economic order.

With respect to the obligation the state has to publish its laws, many states have statutes or constitutional clauses that require them to publish in certain forms (in books or online for example) all their laws within a certain time period.

But, the doctrine does have limits. Consider an example: you walk into the hunting and fishing license office, pay for a license, and ask the employee how many fish you can catch in a single day. The employee tells you 10, and you go out to a local state park, catch your 10 fish and leave. On the way out, a ranger tickets you for catching too many fish – the law actually says you are limited to five. You might not be able to beat the ticket in full, but a judge or commissioner might reduce your fee because you made a good faith effort to comply.

Also, to be convicted under criminal law, some laws require that you knowingly or purposefully act with disregard of the law. So, if you can show that you reasonably attempted to comply with the law, you might get convicted of a lesser offence or get a reduced sentence.

Overall, this really is what lawyers are here to do: interpret the law for you. If you hire a lawyer, rely on his statements, but the lawyer is wrong, you can sue for malpractice. Not a great system, but the alternative, letting people off who claim ignorance, is worse.

Thank you for listening to Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful Life. You can send questions and comments to。。。。。。or call them in to the voicemail line at 206-202-4LAW. Please note that doing so will not create an attorney-client relationship and will be used for the purposes of this podcast only.