Description

In what follows I make a number of theoretical observations in favour of a general conception of sentencing I call sentencing pluralism. I do not contend that the sum total of my observations amount to a theory of sentencing. They certainly do not purport to identify particular sentences that should be imposed in given cases. At most, these observations provide a general framework in which I contend that a theory of sentencing must be situated. This framework is pluralistic in two different respects. In the first part of this paper, I argue that the goals or objectives of a sentencing scheme are diverse and must draw from the insights provided by various disciplines. Thus my framework embodies what I call disciplinary pluralism. Perhaps the most important (but not the only) one of these diverse goals or objectives is to ensure that justice is served by treating offenders as they deserve. It is tempting to believe that offenders are treated as they deserve if their sentences conform to some version of a principle of proportionality. In the second part of this paper, I argue that the sentences offenders deserve cannot be identified without taking account of factors that are not contained within the proportionality calculus. Thus my framework also embodies what I call desert pluralism. I conclude that a sentencing theory that fails to include these two kinds of pluralism is deficient.

Please click here for the event flyer. 

About The Speaker

Douglas Husak is Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at Rutgers University, where he has taught since 1977. Doug is interested in all areas of legal philosophy, but his primary research projects are in the intersection of moral philosophy and criminal law, with a special interest in drug policy. His most important publications are Drugs and Rights (Cambridge, 1992); Overcriminalization (Oxford, 2008); Philosophy of Criminal Law: Selected Essays (Oxford, 2010); and Ignorance of Law (Oxford, 2016). He has served as Editor-in-Chief of both Law and Philosophy and Criminal Law and Philosophy.