Geheim markings marked official disagreement rather than hidden truths.

Evidence

Often an alleged attack on the “reasoning” of the court is really a disagreement with the value judgment implicit in the court’s major premise—a disagreement with the court’s selection and interpretation of the applicable legal precept. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451

Related

• Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. (similarity 0.86)
• The high deference usually reflected in ‘rationality review’ represents a recognition that courts might misunderstand the facts, and that when the facts are unclear, judgments of value should be… (similarity 0.82)
• I believe I must endorse both these observations. A glance at the law reviews dishearteningly confirms that the universities produce an enormous amount of legal criticism—really commentary on… (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. #complicates (0.50) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451