Courts must decide only the case before them, not hypothetical future cases

Evidence

Regardless of the issue on which rehearing en banc was granted, the court is deciding this criminal case and no other. Instead of speculating about a string of successful prosecutions in other cases, we must focus on a relatively short string of prosecutions—the successful trial of Standefer preceded by the unsuccessful trial of Niederberger. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1008

Categorization

• XREF: This anticipates the core of the actual Supreme Court decision in United States v. Standefer and reflects Aldisert’s discipline against slippery-slope reasoning in judicial opinions. — connects to: Common law judges may only decide the case before them — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 227; A case precedent only holds for the precise issue before it — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1237; Courts extend general rules without committing a fallacy when underlying conditions match. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1112 (+7 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1008

Broader Connections

• Common law judges may only decide the case before them #corroborates (0.90) — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 227
• A case precedent only holds for the precise issue before it #expands (0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1237
• Courts extend general rules without committing a fallacy when underlying conditions match. #qualifies (0.40) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1112
• Stated precedent rules often fail to determine later case outcomes #expands (0.35) — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 216