Legal Positivism is a school of thought in jurisprudence and the philosophy of law which posits that the validity of a law is not connected to its moral correctness, but rather depends solely on its creation by a legally recognized authority. Stemming from the Latin word "positus" (to posit), this theory advocates that law is a set of rules put into place by a sovereign or governing body, and its authority is derived from the fact that it has been enacted by that authority following proper procedures. This perspective stands in contrast to natural law theories, which suggest that the validity of law is inherently tied to moral considerations.
One of the central figures in the development of Legal Positivism was the 19th-century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who argued that legal principles should be codified clearly and accessible to all citizens. Following Bentham, John Austin further developed this theory, introducing the idea of a sovereign being the sole source of law and the concept of law as a command issued by the uncommanded commander—the sovereign. Austin's formulation that law is a command backed by a sanction, issued by a sovereign to whom people have a habit of obedience, highlights the disconnection between law and morality emphasized by legal positivists.
In the 20th century, H.L.A. Hart, another pivotal figure in Legal Positivism, criticized and expanded on Austin's ideas. Hart introduced the distinction between primary and secondary legal rules, where primary rules govern conduct and secondary rules provide methods to create, modify, or adjudicate primary rules. Hart's model, called the "Rule of Recognition", is a social rule that serves as the foundational legal authority, allowing laws to be objectively validated. The Rule of Recognition, therefore, is a cornerstone concept in understanding modern legal positivist arguments, emphasizing a more systemic approach to legal order and its acceptance by society.
Contemporary debates around Legal Positivism often engage with criticisms from natural law theorists, who argue that a failure to consider moral dimensions in law can lead to unjust laws being obeyed and enforced. Despite such critiques, Legal Positivism remains influential in the analysis of constitutional law, international law, and the function of courts. It significantly shapes discussions on legal interpretation, the limits of law, and the role of judges. Advocates of positivism argue for its practicality in creating a clear, manageable system of laws that can adapt to social changes without being hindered by often contentious moral debates. This reliance on a structured, orderly approach to legal validity and authority underpins much of legal practice and education today, indicating the enduring impact of LegalPositivism in both theoretical and practical realms of law.