Abstract

De minimis defenses are an understudied aspect of law, appearing in legal practice more often than in legal theory but rarely garnering any type of extensive analysis in either. This has led to an unfortunate state of affairs in which one term is applied to a set of practices that are, at best, only loosely connected. Using Paul Robinson’s system of defense types, this paper will illustrate the various roles and functions the de minimis defense plays in our legal system. In doing so, it will highlight the dangers of viewing the defense as monolithic and suggest that our terminology surrounding de minimis ought to be revised due to the differing justifications that support the application of each de minimis type.