Also known as: reasonings · legal reasoning · judicial reasoning
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A cognitive faculty by which a person understands the nature and wrongfulness of actions. A defect in this faculty caused by mental disease can support an insanity defense when it prevents the defendant from knowing conduct is wrongful or understanding its quality.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Rowan Russell, diagnosed with schizophrenia, sets a fire believing it fulfills a divine command. At trial he shows the disease produced a defect in reasoning that left him unable to recognize the act was wrongful under societal standards. The court acquits him because the impairment satisfied the required elements of the defense.
Rajesh Rao challenges a state ban on contraceptive counseling. The court examines whether the statute invades a protected zone of personal decision making. Its reasoning concludes that the ban violates fundamental liberties derived from multiple constitutional provisions.
Ralph Richardson sues in federal court for injuries sustained on state land. The court determines whether to apply state tort rules or a general federal common law. Its reasoning holds that state law governs because no federal statute or constitutional provision supplies a contrary rule.
Regina Robinson seeks a building permit for beachfront property. The commission demands a public access easement as a condition. The court reasons that the condition lacks an essential nexus to the project's impact and therefore violates the Takings Clause.
Roberto Reyes objects that trust beneficiaries received only publication notice of an accounting proceeding. The court reasons that due process requires notice reasonably calculated to reach interested parties under the circumstances of the case.
Roger Ramirez seeks recognition of his out-of-state same-sex marriage. The court reasons that the fundamental right to marry extends to same-sex couples because exclusion demeans their dignity and imposes unequal burdens without adequate justification.
The defendant must show a mental disease caused the defect and that the defect prevented knowledge that the conduct was wrongful or understanding of its nature and quality. Mere loss of control is insufficient.
Supporting sources
No. The defendant must also lack capacity to recognize that society regards the conduct as wrong. Personal moral conviction alone does not satisfy the test.
Supporting sources
…willing to take the big leap, it is hard to see how it can say no to the shorter one. It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage. If “[t]here is dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry and in their autonomy…