The Limitations of Lon L. Fuller’s “Two Moralities” Theory through the Film A Time to Kill

Abstract

The film A Time to Kill portrays the story of an African American family living in the state of Mississippi, United States, during a period when racial discrimination and social inequality remained pervasive. The family’s 10-year-old daughter is brutally raped and physically assaulted by two white men, resulting in serious injuries. Confronted with overwhelming anger and despair toward the justice system, the father is unable to wait for the state’s legal process to impose punishment and instead seeks personal revenge. On the day of the trial, he enters the courthouse and fatally shoots those two defendants. During the incident, a police officer is also seriously injured, resulting in the loss of his leg. According to criminal law, the act of killing another person must be subject to punishment. However, the film concludes with the court rendering a judgement of not guilty for the father.

Considering this, the authors employ the modern natural law theory of Lon L. Fuller as a philosophical framework to analyze the jury and court’s judgement. The study aims to assess the extent to which the judgement aligns with Fuller’s The Morality of Law, particularly his concept of the Two Moralities: consists of the Morality of Duty and the Morality of Aspiration. The lack of a clearly defined boundary between these two moralities creates interpretive challenges, limitations in application, and issues of legal legitimacy when applied to this case. Consequently, the authors present certain limitations that may arise when applying Fuller’s theoretical and legal principles to such a morally and legally complex case.