H.L.A. Hart, denying that statutes of law are “commands” in some fundamental sense, urged courts to preserve the utilitarian distinction between law as it is and law as it ought to be, arguing that a court deeming some statute to be patently immoral may hold that the statute
lacks the force of law because contrary to the existing conscience of the public
lacks the force of law because contrary to the conscience of humanity
is to be held in disregard and immaterial in view of the court’s construction of what makes up the “settled” meaning of the law
