Vague legal standards invite courts to beg the question

Evidence

The truth is that we are all sinners; nobody’s record is clean and indeed it is only fair to say that much of the very texture of the law invites us to sin, for it so often holds out to us, as though they were objective standards, terms like “reasonable care,” “due notice,” “reasonable restraint,” which are no more than signals that the dispute is to be decided with moderation and without disregard of any of the interests at stake. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1169

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the problem of vagueness in legal standards — ‘reasonable care’ style standards recur throughout torts and criminal law doctrine. — connects to: Begging the question is the most litigation-generating logical fault — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1169; Knowledge of logical canons enables the detection of misleading legal arguments — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 97; Statutory interpretation problems usually involve vagueness, not ambiguity — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 689 (+2 more)
• SEED: Could be an essay on how open-textured standards function as decision signals rather than rules, and when that is legitimate.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1169

Broader Connections

• Begging the question is the most litigation-generating logical fault #expands (0.50) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1169
• Knowledge of logical canons enables the detection of misleading legal arguments #corroborates (0.45) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 97