
Dr Marie Newhouse
About
Biography
Marie Newhouse is an Associate Professor (Reader) in Law, Philosophy, and Public Policy at the University of Surrey. Her research focuses on legal philosophy, especially Kantian accounts of legal obligation, the nature and limits of the state's legislative authority, and criminal wrongdoing. Current projects use Hohfeldian legal concepts to clarify aspects of Kant's theory of innate right, recharacterize the necessity defense as a domain of residual liberty, and explore metaethical questions related to the nature of justice. She also sometimes writes about institutional corruption. She holds a B.A. in political science from the University of Washington, a J.D. from the University of Washington School of Law, and a Ph.D. in public policy from Harvard University. Dr. Newhouse has appeared on BBC News, BBC World News, and BBC Breakfast as a legal analyst.
Areas of specialism
University roles and responsibilities
- Director of Advancement
- Deputy Director of Admissions
- Founding Director (Emerita), Surrey Center for Law & Philosophy
Affiliations and memberships
ResearchResearch interests
Read a full list of publications
My research focuses on legal philosophy, especially Kantian accounts of legal obligation, the legislative authority, the nature of criminal wrongdoing, and legal interpretation. Current projects use Hohfeldian legal concepts to clarify aspects of Kant's theory of innate right, especially his commitment to equality under law. Forthcoming work also offers a novel account of the necessity defense as a domain of residual liberty, and explores metaethical questions related to the nature of justice.
In the video below, I comment on Kant scholar Jen Timmermenn's new book: Kant's Theory of Sympathy. I suggest that Timmermann has a compelling account of the Kantian duty of Theilnehmung as sympathetic participation, and I try to show that his work can shed new light on the corresponding vice of Schadenfreude, and also on the structure of Kant's duties of love more generally.
Research interests
Read a full list of publications
My research focuses on legal philosophy, especially Kantian accounts of legal obligation, the legislative authority, the nature of criminal wrongdoing, and legal interpretation. Current projects use Hohfeldian legal concepts to clarify aspects of Kant's theory of innate right, especially his commitment to equality under law. Forthcoming work also offers a novel account of the necessity defense as a domain of residual liberty, and explores metaethical questions related to the nature of justice.
In the video below, I comment on Kant scholar Jen Timmermenn's new book: Kant's Theory of Sympathy. I suggest that Timmermann has a compelling account of the Kantian duty of Theilnehmung as sympathetic participation, and I try to show that his work can shed new light on the corresponding vice of Schadenfreude, and also on the structure of Kant's duties of love more generally.
Teaching
2022-23: Law and Contemporary Social Issues.
Previous teaching: Criminal Law, Public Law, Equity and Trusts.
PhD supervision: I am happy to consider supervising projects at the intersection of law and philosophy, particularly those working within Kantian paradigms.
Publications
Highlights
Individuals sometimes do things that they know will violate the terms of a statute. Most scholars deny that such actions are always morally wrong, but a coherent theoretical account of the relationships between 1) moral obligation, 2) legal obligation, and 3) criminal wrongdoing that can robustly classify hard cases has been elusive. This article starts with a Kantian account of the relationship between law and morality, and it proposes two closely related standards: one for legal obligation, and another for criminal wrongdoing. It then tests the plausibility and resilience of these standards by using them to generate illuminating new analyses of classic hypothetical cases involving alleged crimes committed under circumstances of necessity. These analyses offer reason to believe that the standards proposed in this article can anchor a Kantian theory of criminal responsibility that is simultaneously rigorous and humane.