Judicial discretion means choosing among alternatives thought equally permissible rather than reasoned elaboration
Evidence
It is obvious, is it not, that Shaw in such a case would have been exercising discretion, in the technical sense earlier defined. See pp. 161-62, above. He would have been making a choice among two or more alternatives - here many more - each of which was being thought of a permissible. At least in cases of “first impression”, he would have been treating the judicial power as a discretionary power rather than as a power of reasoned elaboration. Would this have been a good thing? For the litigants? For the law? — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 373
Categorization
- DEFINE: Precise definition of what counts as judicial ‘discretion’ vs. reasoned elaboration - useful technical vocabulary across the legal systems course.
- XREF: Connects to the lawmaking-as-byproduct distinction from ch0 and the adjudicative function discussion. — connects to: Judicial discretion is channeled by constraints, not eliminated. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 188; Judicial decisions depend entirely on articulated reasons rather than fiat — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 138; Judges create law when forced to choose among competing interpretations. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 196 (+3 more)
- recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
Broader Connections
- Judicial discretion is channeled by constraints, not eliminated.
#qualifies(0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 188 - Judicial decisions depend entirely on articulated reasons rather than fiat
#contradicts(0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 138 - Judges create law when forced to choose among competing interpretations.
#expands(0.82) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 196