Re:On Casuistry
by patjenk on Monday November 30, 2020 @04:20PM
(#25259121)
Let me abuse pythonic values:
IMHO, minimum sentencing requirements and a rigid adherence to stare decisis is harmful.[1]
On the other hand, it is helpful to have a reasonable expectation for how things are going to turn out.[2]
I don't have the time to compare and contrast "casuistry" with legal realism, but my hunch is it would end up with the same result: judges figure out how they want to rule and then pick and choose what law to use to get there.
[1] PEP 8 (Quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson), "A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds".
[2] PEP 20, "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it."
IMHO, minimum sentencing requirements and a rigid adherence to stare decisis is harmful.[1]
On the other hand, it is helpful to have a reasonable expectation for how things are going to turn out.[2]
I don't have the time to compare and contrast "casuistry" with legal realism, but my hunch is it would end up with the same result: judges figure out how they want to rule and then pick and choose what law to use to get there.
[1] PEP 8 (Quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson), "A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds".
[2] PEP 20, "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it."