Legal Definitions - legal positivism

Legal positivism is a theory in legal philosophy that asserts the validity of a law comes solely from its source or its acceptance within a society, rather than from its moral content or alignment with abstract principles of justice or natural law. In essence, a legal positivist believes that a law is legitimate because it was properly enacted by a recognized political authority (like a legislature) or has become an established custom that people generally follow and accept as binding, regardless of whether one personally believes the law is 'good' or 'bad' from a moral standpoint.

Here are some examples illustrating legal positivism:

• Example 1: A City Parking Ordinance

  A city council passes an ordinance prohibiting parking on a specific street between 7 AM and 9 AM on weekdays to ease traffic congestion during rush hour. Under legal positivism, this parking restriction is a valid law because the city council, acting as a recognized political authority, properly enacted it through the established legal process. Its validity does not depend on whether individual residents agree it's the "best" or "fairest" parking rule, or if it aligns with some universal moral principle about urban planning. It is law simply because it was made law by the proper authority.

• Example 2: A National Sales Tax

  A national legislature passes a new law imposing a 5% sales tax on all digital streaming services. From a legal positivist perspective, this new tax is a valid and binding law because it was duly passed by the legislature, which is the legitimate law-making body. Its legal status is not contingent on whether citizens believe it is morally just to tax digital services, or if it aligns with a natural right to untaxed commerce. The law's validity stems entirely from its proper enactment by the sovereign authority, making it enforceable regardless of individual moral judgments.

• Example 3: Court Procedural Rules

  A country's highest court establishes a rule stating that all appeals against a lower court's judgment must be filed within 30 days of the original decision. This 30-day deadline is a valid legal rule because it was established by the appropriate legal authority (in this case, the judiciary's rule-making body). Its validity as a law does not come from an inherent moral imperative that appeals *must* be filed within 30 days, but rather from its formal creation and acceptance within the legal system as a necessary procedural guideline for the orderly administration of justice.