Reference no: EM133490041
Case Study: READ: On May 5, 2020, in a Dallas courtroom, Shelley Luther faced sentencing for violating a local and statewide stay-at-home order in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: after a month-long shutdown, she had reopened her beauty salon and publicly tore up a cease-and-desist letter demanding she close again. She was convicted of civil and criminal contempt of a lawful order. A court case, one would think, that would be easy to overlook in a time of national distress.
Until emotional appeals and arguments entered the story. The presiding judge, Eric Moyé, a man with strong Democratic ties and a penchant "for Cuban cigars and the finest steaks" (according to a 2007 story in the New York Times that got noticed), sentenced Luther to a week in jail when she refused to close the salon and failed to apologize for keeping her salon open. "Your actions were selfish," the judge said, "putting your own interests ahead of those of the community in which you live."
"I have to disagree with you, sir, when you say I'm selfish," Luther replied, "because feeding my kids is not selfish. I have hairstylists that are going hungry because they'd rather feed their kids. So, sir, if you think the law is more important than kids being fed, then go ahead with your decision, because I am not going to shut the salon."
The emotional tug of a mother standing up to a big-time judge to defend children from starvation made the case go national. The emotional appeals were irresistible.
Republican officials reacted quickly. The lieutenant governor of Texas offered to pay Luther's $7,000 fine and go to jail in her place. Governor Mark Abbott retroactively rescinded the emergency order she had obviously violated. The Texas Supreme Court ordered Luther's release after two days in jail. Luther's attorney, appearing on Tucker Carlson Tonight, said her real crime was "heresy against the city of Dallas and the oligarchy that decided real criminals could be let out [of jail], but heretics could go to jail." "Heretics," "oligarchy," "criminals" - emotional terms all. A spectator captures Shelley Luther with police officers in her salon in Austin, Texas, in 2020.
What followed was a week of predictable left/right mudwrestling - a GoFundMe page and demonstrations of support, concerns about Luther's attack on the judiciary and accusations of bad faith, suggestions that Luther's protest was an organized political stunt. When Luther appeared on The View, she admitted she'd already received $18,000 in stimulus funds from the government but didn't know how she was supposed to spend it.
In the middle of the controversy, Tom M. Melsheimer, a prominent Dallas attorney, offered a thoughtful take that centers around respect for the law. He argues that Ms. Luther
was punished for the most routine and non-controversial of reasons: she violated a legitimate and legal order from a court, even after her request for appellate review was denied.
To suggest otherwise or to make her some kind of a martyr for a cause is a disservice to martyrs and causes.
But the controversy is dangerous too. The criticism of the judge in this instance undermines the rule of law, which is a cornerstone of our democracy.
What Judge Moyé did in Ms. Luther's case is what judges all over the country do regularly - enforce their orders.
- The Texas Lawbook, "Legal Expert: Governor and AG Make ‘Silly and Dangerous' Hot Mess of Shelley Luther Case"
Question: After you have read through, look again at the comments on the case by Tom M. Melsheimer, a Dallas attorney. Discuss then how he analyzes the aspects of "pathos" in the argument, both sides, from a more objective position.