Non-binding precedents still persuade courts through their perceived correctness.

Evidence

Of course, even when precedents are not authoritative, they may still be persuasive. Thus, a federal court of appeals may decide, after learning how another appeals court has interpreted a federal law, that the interpretation was correct and adopt it. Or the Supreme Court may conclude that its earlier rulings interpreting, say, the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments were correct and use them to justify its ruling in a current case. Similarly, judges in Alabama or Oregon may seek guidance in the rulings of judges from other states in interpreting the common law. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2486

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains persuasive precedent as distinct from authoritative precedent, with concrete court examples.
• XREF: Connects to the course value of fairness — consistency across jurisdictions as a norm rather than a command.