So half of 279 (=~140) students cheat, and 70 are forced out.
Gosh. It makes you wonder what sort of privilege the other 70 cheaters invoked. Who was sacrificed? Who was spared?
Selective enforcement of the "law" is no law at all.
Gosh. It makes you wonder what sort of privilege the other 70 cheaters invoked. Who was sacrificed? Who was spared?
Selective enforcement of the "law" is no law at all.
Of course, considering that it's an Introduction to Congress class, you could argue that the cheaters grasped the essence of Congress better than the non-cheaters.
Those enforcing a law are typically free to find different answers (punishments) to similar questions (crimes) as long as they can distinguish the case.
The big dangerous problem, rule-of-law-wise, is when a court deviates in its method of judging, not in its judgements.
If to you, that sentence is synonymous with "half were cheating". I'd say it's your interpretation of the law that is suspect.
Actually it's very much a law. And it's how the law works in the real world. It might not be "justice", but it's law alright.
From the kid who the local cop knows his family and lets him walk on something that would land someone else in juvenile prison to the rich guy literally getting away with murder. And there are stuff that cops selectively enforce everyday, e.g ignoring someone selling dope small-time, because he snitches bigger fishes for them.
A law can still be effective, if the selective enforcement prevents the majority of the people of breaking it.