As the end of October nears, children everywhere are wetting their pants in anticipation for the one time of year where wearing a Spider-man costume and asking for candy won’t land you in jail. Ahhh Halloween, how we love thee. It’s everyone’s favorite holiday, unless its hot sister Christmas is around, in which case take a message and tell it we’re washing our hair. Halloween is great. It’s a time for pumpkin-carving, trick-or-treating (as long as you don’t live in New Orleans), and of course, pranks.
Sometimes a well-laid prank can be even better than all that candy. Who doesn’t love leaving a flaming bag of dog poop in front of your cranky neighbor doorstep or covering said neighbor’s house in toilet paper? Not to mention the all-time classic, “bidding on a federal auction for oil and gas leases when you don’t have the money or intention to follow through on it.”
Don’t remember that one? It was all the rage when I was still in elementary school. I remember how my friends and I would dress up in a suit and tie, go down to the old Bureau of Land Management, or BLM for all you youngins, and place a phony bid posing as representatives for a kooky billionaire. Still doesn’t ring a bell, huh? Oh well, I guess I’m just getting too old to keep up with all these new fangled pranks…
But at least there’s one person who is keeping it alive. But Tim DeChristopher is doing it for an entirely different reason. Making a stand for the environment?? Psshtshaw… Whatever happened to just messing with people because it’s fun?
Seriously though, this is a very serious offense. DeChristopher is being charged with two felony counts, carrying up to five years in prison plus fines up to $750,000. The reason he did it was to cause disruption in protesting what he believes are governmental acts that are contributing to the rise of global warming.
But whether you believe in DeChristopher’s cause or not, you’ve gotta admire the legal defense he’s planning to use: a necessity defense. It’s basically a choice of evil defense, where a person is forced to choose between breaking the law and preventing some evil/harm, or letting that evil/harm happen. The article does a good job of summarizing DeChristopher’s chances of succeeding with this defense. Though I think they missed one important aspect: standing.
Usually to employ such a necessity defense, especially against the federal government, a person would have to show that he or she was actually harmed by the actions of the government. No actual harm usually equals no defense. I say usually because like every good law school will teach a first-year student, it depends.
I suppose DeChristopher could make some argument that the harm to the environment hurts the planet which in turn harms his life expectancy by increasing the chances of natural disaster or depleting the ozone layer which would lead to increased exposure to harmful UV rays. But looking at most case precedent, these types of arguments are considered too nebulous and broad to ever succeed.
Good for him for trying though. The number of lawsuits received by LegalMatch regarding environmental issues, land-use, and toxic torts has increased by approximately 20 percent from last quarter, so it seems like they’re all the rage now. So maybe Lady Luck will smile in DeChristopher’s favor, though if you ask me, she’s probably terminally ill from skin cancer…