The rule of law does not need to be supported or expanded by "extra-legal" doctrines of morality. The laws as they exist today in this country are based upon a system of morality that has evolved over thousands of years. Our laws embody this system of morality and do not need to be supported by other doctrines of morality. Moral notions of good and bad laws exist to prevent the government from abusing the rights of its citizens. In order for the rule of law to allow a government to exercise power, governments should not execute laws in arbitrary fashion. Those who make and enforce the law are themselves bound to adhere to it. "The legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers or either of them: the executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them: the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men" (Massachusetts Constitution, Part the First, art. XXX, 1780). .

             The rule of law implies that government authority may only be exercised in accordance with written laws, which were adopted through an established procedure. The government is responsible for maintaining civil order and peace through a system of generated rule. No individual should be punished if that individual doesn't know the law. The rule of law implies that individuals must know the law in order to be punished. This principle is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary rulings in individual cases. The concept of "rule of law" per se says nothing of the "justness" of the laws themselves, but simply how the legal system upholds the law. As a consequence of this, a very undemocratic nation or one without respect for human rights can exist with or without a "rule of law", a situation which many argue is applicable to several modern dictatorships.