Legislatures may appropriately wait for courts to act first on an issue.
Evidence
Should the legislature have been expected to act on this issue before it had been decided in the courts? More quickly than it did, after the court had spoken? — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 428
Categorization
- XREF: Raises the sequencing-of-institutions question (courts before legislatures) central to the casebook’s approach. — connects to: 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; Courts may revise common-law rules even where legislatures have failed to act — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 2368; Legislatures can use declaratory language to correct unwelcome judicial decisions — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 4830
Broader Connections
- Legislatures can use declaratory language to correct unwelcome judicial decisions
#complicates(0.80) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 4830 - Courts should rarely infer legislators intended to freeze a decision’s rule
#qualifies(0.75) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3351 - Courts may revise common-law rules even where legislatures have failed to act
#complicates(0.75) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2368