Self-study
The following passages are adapted from articles recently published in North American law review journals.
███████ █
P1
██ ████████ ███ ██████ ██████ ██████ ████ █████████ ██ ██████ █████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ███ ██████████ █████████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ███████████ ██████ ███████ ████ █████████ ██ █ ████████ ██ ██████ █ ████████ ███ ██ ████████████ ███████ ███████████ ██████ █ ██ ████ ██████ █ ████ █████████ ██████████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████ █ ███████████ ████ ██ ████ ██████████████ █ ████ █ █████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ █████
Question ·
Why is blackmail illegal under Canadian and US law?
Blackmail combines two acts that are each legal alone -- threatning to expose info, and seeking money from another. Why is it illegal to combine these actions?
P2
███ ████ ██ █ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████ █████████████ ███████ █ █████ ████ ███████ █████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████████ ███████ ████ █████████████ ████ █████████ ████████ ███████ ████████ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ██ ███████████ ███ ██ ███████ ████████ ████████ █████████ ██ ████████
Consequences of lack of answer ·
No clear line between legal and illegal blackmail
Blackmail statutes are broad and cover conduct that most people would think should be legal.
P3
██ ██ █████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ █ ████████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ███ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ████ ██ █████ ██ █████ █ █████████████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███████ ████ █ █████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ █████ ██████ ██ ███████ █████ ████ ███ ████████████ ███ ████████ ████ █ ███████████ █████████ ██ ████ ██ █ ████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ████
Answer to question ·
Illegal because of triangular structure
Blackmailer uses leverage that's dependent on a third party (the government). This misuses a third party for the blackmailer's own benefit.
███████ █
P4
█████████ █████ ███ ███ ██ ███████ ████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ ███ ██████████ █████ ███████ █████ █████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ███ ██████ ██████ █████ ███ ██ ███████████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ██████ ███████
Blackmail in Roman law ·
No special category for blackmail
Roman law evaluated actions based on harm, not based on the legality or illegality of the action itself.
P5
█████ █████████████████ ███████ ██ ███████████ ████ █ ██████ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ ███████ ███████████ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ███ █████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ████ █████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███ █████ ███ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ████ ████████ █████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████████
Assumption about blackmail ·
Blackmail presumed harmful if it revealed hurt victim's reputation
Party who threatened blackmail had burden to prove good reason for revealing the info.
P6
██ ██████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ ██████████ █ █████ ██████████ ████████ █████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████████ █████ ███████████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ █████ ███ ████ ██ ██ ████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ ████ ████ ███ █ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████ █ ██████ ████ ███ ██████ ███████████ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ██████ █████████ ████ ███████ █████████ ████████ ████████ ██ ██ ████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ███
Relevance of truth ·
Truth of a revealed fact not enough to make blackmail legal
True revelation was legal only if there was a legitimate purpose in revealing the info and the government had an interest in having the info revealed.
Passage Style
19.
The relationship between the ways ██ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █████ ███ █████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████
a
One country legally ████████ ██████ ███████ ██ █ █████████ ██ ██ ████████ ███ ████████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ████████████
This describes one country that has prerequisites for performing a certain act, and another country that doesn’t have those prerequisites. But neither of the legal systems we’re interested in have “prerequisites” to allow blackmail. The Canadian and U.S. system says that blackmail is illegal in and of itself, while the Roman system says blackmail is illegal because it’s already more broadly illegal to reveal damaging information about someone for selfish reasons. Neither one says, “You can blackmail as long as you get these approvals first.” And neither one says, “You can blackmail all you like—no prerequisites needed.”
b
One country makes ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ ███████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ██████
This describes one country that places fewer restrictions on an activity, and another country that places more restrictions. But both of the legal systems we’re looking at consider blackmail flat-out illegal. The difference between the countries is why blackmail is illegal. (The Canadian and U.S. system says that blackmail is illegal in and of itself, while the Roman system says it’s illegal because it’s already more broadly illegal to reveal damaging information about someone for selfish reasons.) (C) might be an okay analogy for how each system treats free speech (Rome has tighter restrictions on it), but the question asks us for how these systems treat blackmail itself.
c
One country legally ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████████
This describes one country that’s permits more of an activity than another country does. But both of the legal systems we’re looking at consider blackmail flat-out illegal. The difference between the countries is why blackmail is illegal. (The Canadian and U.S. system says that blackmail is illegal in and of itself, while the Roman system says it’s illegal because it’s already more broadly illegal to reveal damaging information about someone for selfish reasons.) (C) might be an okay analogy for how each system treats free speech (Rome has tighter restrictions on it), but the question asks us for how these systems treat blackmail itself.
d
One country makes ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ ███ ███ █████████
The first country is analogous to Canada and the U.S., which explicitly make blackmail illegal. The second country is analogous to Rome, which
e
One country makes ██ ███████ ██ █████ ███████████ ████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ████ ███████████ ███ █████ ██████ ███ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ██████ ███████ ████ ██ ████ █████ ██████████
In this scenario, one country says, “You can’t do X,” while another country says, “You can do X, but if you break other rules while doing X, the punishment will be harsher than if you hadn’t been doing X.” The second country isn’t analogous to either of the legal systems we’re looking at. Neither the Canadian and U.S. system nor the Roman system says, “You can blackmail people, but if you break other rules while blackmailing, the punishment will be harsher than if you hadn’t been blackmailing.”