Bare antiquity never justifies a legal rule once its original grounds lapse

Evidence

“It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply persists from blind imitation of the past.” — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1247

Categorization

• DEFINE: The Oliver Wendell Holmes quotation crystallizes the core critique of mechanical adherence to precedent: authority must trace to current reason, not dead origin.
• SHARE: This Holmes line is exactly the sort of thing a legal-systems instructor would love quoted back in discussion.
• XREF: connects to: Overruling precedent is never an absolute good but a choice between relative evils — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1240; Legal rules resting only on past authority deserve condemnation when their rationale has lapsed — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1067; A punishment form tied to early capitalism cannot claim eternal validity (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Legal rules resting only on past authority deserve condemnation when their rationale has lapsed #corroborates (0.92) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1067
• A punishment form tied to early capitalism cannot claim eternal validity #exemplifies (0.82)
• Historical laws are constituted regularities, not metaphysical or causal determinants #expands (0.75) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1464
• History as ground must be conceived as an absent cause resisting reification #qualifies (0.72) — Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 2294