Justice priced out of reach
What happens when a state charges people to use its courts? Bentham says a tax on going to law sells the rich a protection it quietly withholds from the poor.
A tax on legal proceedings, Bentham argues, is a levy on the one thing a state exists to supply, justice, and so a way of selling to the rich a protection it denies the poor. A man who cannot afford the duty on a writ cannot sue at all; the tax does not merely raise revenue, it closes the courthouse door by income. His case is that the cost of a service should fall on those who use it, not sit as a general toll, and that a government pricing its poorer subjects out of justice has abandoned the reason it collects taxes at all.
- oppression
- access to justice
- justice
- litigation
- taxation
- poverty
- legal costs
Enter a dialogue
- Courts cost money to run, so isn't a modest fee on those who use them simply fair, rather than the injustice you paint?
- A poor man can buy half a taxed loaf but never half a lawsuit. Why is a tax on justice worse than a tax on bread?
- Outlawry strips a man of the law's protection, a punishment for grave offenders. Why do you say a mere tax does the same to the innocent poor?
- Officials say a tax on lawsuits checks pointless ones. Why do you say it instead helps the litigant who knows he is in the wrong?
- Many scorn a lawsuit over a small sum as trivial. Why is no wrong trivial, in your view, when its victim cares enough to sue?