Judicial decisions depend entirely on articulated reasons rather than fiat

Evidence

Case law stands or falls solely on the reasons articulated to justify it. There can be legislative fiat, but not judicial fiat. Reason justifies the legal rule emanating from a court decision. Where stops the reason, there stops the rule. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 138

Categorization

• XREF: XREF legal reasoning vs legislative fiat — connects to: Logical reasoning provides the foundation that prevents common law from becoming arbitrary fiat. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 122; Legal analogy requires a theoretical basis rather than mere perception — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 608; Judicial generalization and analogical reasoning constitute the process of induction — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 676 (+8 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 138

Library Connections

• Logical reasoning provides the foundation that prevents common law from becoming arbitrary fiat. #corroborates (0.95) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 122

Broader Connections

• Legal analogy requires a theoretical basis rather than mere perception #corroborates (0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 608
• The formal principle of justice requires treating relevantly similar cases alike #corroborates (0.75) — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 418
• Deceptive judicial rhetoric does not refute explanations of behavior #complicates (0.70) — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 120
• Judges’ attitudes cannot be reliably inferred from opinion rhetoric #complicates (0.70) — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 120
• Judicial generalization and analogical reasoning constitute the process of induction #expands (0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 676
• Justifying a legal system differs fundamentally from causally explaining it through politics or psychology #expands (0.60) — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 181