Deductive reasoning cannot explain novel cases, competing rules, or legal change

Evidence

For legal reasoning to follow the deductive model, there must be a single legal rule for the judge to apply in deciding the case. But there may be cases for which there is no controlling precedent or established legal rule; for instance, when a judge interprets a recently enacted statute, addresses a novel constitutional claim, or confronts an unprecedented situation at common law. … For other cases, there may be more than one category or rule that seems applicable. In fact, the issue in dispute may be which rule to apply. Thus, the deductive model of judicial decision making cannot explain how judges deal with novel issues or choose between competing rules. Finally, the deductive model portrays the law as static, with judges consistently applying existing legal standards. In actuality, however, judicial decisions may change the law by overruling precedents or announcing new legal standards. The deductive model may explain legal stability, but it cannot account for legal change. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1256

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Most court cases are resolved mechanically by settled law — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1254; Deductive judicial reasoning classifies facts, finds the rule, and applies it — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1253; Judges create legal rules by weighing case similarities, not by applying fixed rules — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1263 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Deductive legal analysis applies established characteristic propositions to new cases #corroborates (0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 680
• Judges create and reshape legal rules by reasoning analogically across cases, not by deduction #corroborates (0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2542
• Deductive legal reasoning requires identifying the controlling major premise. #expands (0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 751
• Common law rules arise from comparing cases, not from tracing prior logic #corroborates (0.80) — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 222