This inquiry asks students to explore issues of individual responsibility and moral choice by investigating the compelling question, “I was only following orders! Is this an acceptable defense?” Students will consider Dr. Solis’s question about actions taken during the Holocaust and more as they study the history of the “superior orders” defense from its first known use in 1474, through the Nuremberg trials following World War II, to its appearance in our own times. The final summative assignment then asks students to make an argument answering the Compelling Question and support it with evidence from their inquiry.
Login to add Inquiry to Stack
About the inquiry
Compelling Question
“I was only following orders!” Is this an acceptable defense?
Staging Question
Discuss why it is necessary for soldiers to follow orders. Ask, “What if it is an illegal order?”
1
Supporting QuestionHow was the “superior orders” defense used prior to World War II?
Formative TasksStudents complete a timeline illustrating how the standard for judging the superior orders defense changed over time.
SourcesSource A: Excerpt of article describing the first international war crimes trial in 1474.
Source B: 19th-century American and English cases.
Source C: Excerpts from “Obedience of Orders and the Law of War.”
2
Supporting QuestionHow did German officers use the superior orders defense at their trials?
Formative TasksJigsaw Activity: Groups summarize readings then present their summaries to each other while listeners take notes.
SourcesSource A: Summary of the trial of Wilhelm Keitel.
Source B: Summary of the trial of Alfred Jodl.
Source C: Summary of the trial of Rudolf Hoess.
Source D: Excerpt from Adolf Eichmann’s final plea at his war crimes trial.
3
Supporting QuestionDid German military personnel have a “moral choice” available to them? Why did they choose to follow orders?
Formative TasksUse a graphic organizer to compile evidence of what choices German military personnel had and why they chose to follow orders, then summarize findings.
SourcesSource A: Ways soldiers could avoid carrying out orders to commit murder.
Source B: Why they carried out orders to murder.
Source C: Excerpt from “Reserve Police Battalion 101.”
Source D: Excerpt of testimony by perpetrator.
4
Supporting QuestionWhat are today’s laws about following orders in the military?
Formative TasksStudents write a summary of the current legal and military consensus on the acceptability of the superior orders defense.
SourcesSource A: The Nuremberg principles.
Source B: Article 33 of the Rome Statute of the ICC, 1998.
Source C: Article, “When can a soldier disobey an order?”
Source D: Article, “Why German soldiers don’t have to obey orders.”
Summative Performance Task
Argument: I was only following orders” an acceptable defense? Construct an argument (e.g., detailed outline, poster, essay) that discusses the compelling question using specific claims and relevant evidence from historical sources while acknowledging competing views.
Extension: While the Rome Statute is clear that soldiers have an obligation to disobey a “manifestly unlawful” order, it does not state what makes an order “manifestly unlawful.” Work in teams to rewrite the Rome Statute so that it offers a clear statement of what makes an order “manifestly unlawful” so that it is less confusing to officers and soldiers.
Taking Informed Action
No data found.