Module 1: Foundations of Justice

1. Justice in the Name of the Law — Or Injustice in Disguise?

The world is filled with stories told in the name of justice.

But were they truly just?

“Justice without reflection becomes violence with a noble face.”

This lesson examines real cases where the sword of justice was raised — sometimes to protect, sometimes to oppress.

2. Case 1: The Nuremberg Trials (1945–1946)

• Context: After WWII, Nazi leaders were tried for crimes against humanity.

• Justice Delivered: Established precedent for international criminal law

• Philosophical Tension: Ex post facto law — many crimes had no existing statute when committed

• Rawlsian View: Justified under veil of ignorance — no one would design a world where genocide is unpunished

• Libertarian View: Dangerous precedent — laws made after actions occurred

“What was legal in Nazi Germany was not just. What was just in Nuremberg was not legal.”

3. Case 2: The Japanese-American Internment (1942)

• Context: Over 120,000 Japanese Americans were forcibly relocated into camps

• Justification: National security after Pearl Harbor

• U.S. Supreme Court upheld the action in Korematsu v. United States

• Kantian View: Inherently unjust — violated human dignity and treated people as means to an end

• Utilitarian View: Argued for sacrifice of few for safety of many — now widely discredited

“When fear speaks louder than principles, justice vanishes.”

4. Case 3: George Floyd & the Modern Protest for Justice (2020)

• Context: A Black man, George Floyd, was murdered by a police officer in Minneapolis

• Public Response: Global protests against systemic racism and police brutality

• Critical Legal Theory View: The law upholds racial hierarchies unless actively challenged

• Rawlsian View: No one designing society from a veil of ignorance would accept this outcome

• Real-World Outcome: Officer convicted — rare moment of accountability, but systemic problems remain

“If justice is delayed, denied, or selective — is it really justice at all?”

5. International Case: Rwandan Genocide (1994)

• Context: 800,000 people killed in 100 days; international community failed to intervene

• Aftermath: International tribunals held trials; many justice efforts delayed or inadequate

• Moral Question: Is justice still possible when it comes too late?

• Utilitarian View: Intervention may have saved lives, even if costly

• Kantian View: Inaction violated the duty to protect human dignity

“When the shield fails, the sword becomes meaningless.”

6. Justice or Vengeance?

Some actions seem just but raise hard questions:

• Capital punishment: justice or revenge?

• Civil war tribunals: healing or rewriting history?

• Public shaming: accountability or mob justice?

Discussion Point:

What is the line between justice and revenge? Who draws it?

Reflection Questions

1. Which of these cases felt just to you? Which felt unjust?

2. Can justice be retroactive?

3. Should moral laws override legal ones?

4. Who gets to decide when justice is served?

Assignment (Optional)

Choose a case not listed here — historical or modern — and write a short analysis:

• What happened?

• Who claimed justice, and how?

• Apply one theory of justice to the event

• Conclude: Was justice truly served?

Next Lesson Preview:

Lesson 5 – Justice and Emergency: When Law Suspends Itself