Self-study
After a judge has made the first ruling on a particular point of law, judges must follow that precedent if the original ruling is not contrary to the basic moral values of society. ██ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ██████ █████████████ ████ ███████████ ███ █████ ██ █████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ████████ █ █████
Summary
Domain: judge has made first ruling on a particular point of law
If original ruling is not contrary to basic moral values of society → future judges must follow that precedent
Domain: there’s no first ruling on a particular point of law
If judge’s own view does not contradict any widespread public opinion < — > judge may use their own view when deciding a case
(Note that the second principle is a biconditional because of the “and only then”. So if a judge’s own view DOES contradict widespread public opinion, then the judge may NOT use their own view when deciding a case.)
Find or Complete the Application
The correct answer will involve either a situation in which there is an original ruling on a point of law, or there isn’t.
If there is, then the conclusion will involve a judge following the precedent because the original ruling isn’t contrary to basic moral values of society.
If there isn’t precedent, then the conclusion will involve either (1) a judge following their own view because it doesn’t contradict widespread public opinion or (2) a judge NOT following their own view because it does contradict widespread public opinion
19.
Of the rulings described below, █████ ███ ████████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██████
a
Judge Swoboda is ██████████ ████ █ █████ █████ █████ ██████ ████████ █████████ ████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ███████████ ████ ████ ██████ ████████ ██ ███████████ ██████ █ ██████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ █████ ██████
This involves a judge following their own view even though it contradicts widespread public opinion, and there’s no existing precedent. So this contradicts the second principle.
b
Judge Valenzuela decides, ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███████ ███ ██████ ████████ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ █ ████████ ████ ████████ █████ ████████████ ████████ █████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ███ █████ ████████ ███████ ██████ ████████████████ ██ ███████
This involves a judge following their own view even though it contradicts widespread public opinion, and there’s no existing precedent. So this contradicts the second principle.
c
Judge Levinsky sets █ █████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ███████ ██ █████████ ██ ████████ █ █████ ████ ██████████ ███ ████████ ██████████ █████ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ █████ █████ ██████ ████ █████ ██████████ ███████ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ████ █████ ██████████ ██████ ███████ ███ █████ █████ ██████ ██ ████████
This involves a judge not following original precedent even though we don’t have any reason to believe that the original precedent violates basic moral values.
d
Judge Watanabe must ██████ █ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ██ █████ ███ █████ ██ █████ █████████ ███████ █████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ████████ █████ ███████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ████ █████ ███ ██████
This conforms to the second principle, because, in the absence of precedent, the judge follows her own view when it does not contradict any widespread public opinion. (The fact there is no widespread public opinion on the issue means there is no widespread public opinion to be contradicted.)
e
Judge Balila rules ███████ ███ █████████ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ █████ ███ █████ ██████ █████████ ████████ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ███████████ ███ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ █████ ██████ ██ ████████
This involves a judge not following original precedent even though we don’t have any reason to believe that the original precedent violates basic moral values.