Strict liability and the paradoxes of proportionality

Leo Katz*, Alvaro Sandroni

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


This essay explores the case against strict liability offenses as part of the more general debate about proportional punishment. This debate takes on a very different look in light of a formal result derived by the authors elsewhere, that is briefly summarized and whose implications are pursued here. Traditional objections that consequentialists have mounted against the deontologists’/retributivists’ defense of proportionality fall by the wayside, but a new threat to the proportionality requirement replaces it: the ease with which any such requirement can be circumvented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)365-373
Number of pages9
JournalCriminal Law and Philosophy
Issue number3
StatePublished - Sep 1 2018


  • Criminal law
  • Decision theory
  • Proportionality
  • Social choice
  • Strict liability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy
  • Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Strict liability and the paradoxes of proportionality'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this