Legislative-inaction doctrine would freeze all judicial creativity if extended

Evidence

Think about the potential sweep of a doctrine of legislative action by not acting. It can be extended, can it not, beyond the mere prchibition of overruling of an outstanding decision or line of decisions to an inhibition against any kind of creative development of the law by the courts at all? — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3357

Categorization

• QUESTION: The reductio test: how far could the adoption-by-silence logic reach before courts lose every license for creative development?
• XREF: connects to: Congressional inaction following judicial construction can count as adoption of that construction — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3273; Courts should rarely infer legislators intended to freeze a decision’s rule — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3351; Formalism disguises the need for judicial choice by freezing rule meaning — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 370

Broader Connections

• Formalism disguises the need for judicial choice by freezing rule meaning #complicates (0.80) — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 370