“With regard to the abuse of authority, this also may come about in two ways. First, when what is ordered by an authority is opposed to the object for which that authority was constituted (if, for example, some sinful action is commanded or one which is contrary to virtue, when it is precisely for the protection and fostering of virtue that authority is instituted). In such a case, not only is there no obligation to obey the authority, but one is obliged to disobey it, as did the holy martyrs who suffered death rather than obey the impious commands of tyrants. Secondly, when those who bear such authority command things which exceed the competence of such authority; as, for example, when a master demands payment from a servant which the latter is not bound to make, and other similar cases. In this instance the subject is free to obey or disobey.”
in Aquinas: Selected Political Writings (Basil Blackwell: 1974), p. 183
Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Thomas Aquinas 104
Italian Dominican scholastic philosopher of the Roman Catho… 1225–1274Related quotes

in Aquinas: Selected Political Writings (Basil Blackwell: 1974), p. 183
Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard
Source: The Christian Agnostic (1965), p.49, [ellipsis added]

Young India (29 January 1925) p. 41
1920s

Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931).
Judicial opinions

Quoted in Glenn Kessler, "Rice Defends Enhanced Interrogations," http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/04/30/rice_defends_enhanced_interrog.html?hpid=news-col-blog Washington Post (2009-04-30).
Context: In terms of the enhanced interrogation and so forth, anything that was legal and was going to make this country safer, the president wanted to do. Nothing that was illegal. And nothing that was going to make the country less safe. Unless you were there, in a position of responsibility after September 11th, you cannot possibly imagine the dilemmas that you faced in trying to protect Americans. You were determined to do anything that you could that was legal to prevent that from happening again... We were told, nothing that violates our obligations under the Convention Against Torture. And so, by definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Conventions Against Torture.

1980s, GNU Manifesto (1985)