The high deference usually reflected in ‘rationality review’ represents a recognition that courts might misunderstand the facts, and that when the facts are unclear, judgments of value should be made politically, not judicially.
Evidence
Often an alleged attack on the “reasoning” of the court is really a disagreement with the value judgment implicit in the court’s major premise—a disagreement with the court’s selection and interpretation of the applicable legal precept. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451 (
#expands, via linked claim)
In the law, as well as in life itself, judging is the act of selecting and weighing facts and suggestions as they present themselves, as well as of deciding whether the alleged facts are really facts and whether an idea suggested is a sound idea or merely a fancy. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 165 (
#expands, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451; Judging requires selecting relevant facts and evaluating relative values — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 165
Related
- Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. (similarity 0.88)
- Judging requires selecting relevant facts and evaluating relative values (similarity 0.86)
- I believe I must endorse both these observations. A glance at the law reviews dishearteningly confirms that the universities produce an enormous amount of legal criticism—really commentary on… (similarity 0.83)
- Logic tests the validity of propositions after value judgments drive decisions (similarity 0.82)
- Judges rely on personal values when competing legal principles are evenly balanced (similarity 0.82)
- Geheim markings marked official disagreement rather than hidden truths. (similarity 0.82)
- Judicial decisions are governed by beliefs about facts and rules (similarity 0.81)
- Selecting a major premise depends on value judgments rather than strict logic (similarity 0.81)
- Reasoning requires recognizing real logical connections and relationships among facts (similarity 0.80)
- Legal outcomes depend on variable choices and value judgments rather than absolutes. (similarity 0.79)
Broader Connections
- Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments.
#expands(0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451 - Judging requires selecting relevant facts and evaluating relative values
#expands(0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 165