In America, judicial precedent is law. This is true even if it is true that:
a) Some of that law is bad law;
b) Some of that law is unconstitutional law;
c) Some of that law would be "honored in the breach";
d) Some of that law outrages us;
e) Some of that law could be overturned tomorrow;
f) Some of that law is contrary to God's law;
and we could probably think of many more to go with those.
The fact that judicial precedent is law in America can be seen in a variety of ways:
1) Look at dictionary definitions (I was told that this approach is un-American, but let the reader judge) http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2015/09/taking-un-american-stance.html
2) Look up what it means that America is a "Common Law" jurisdiction as distinction from a "Civil Code" jurisdiction.
https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/common-law-vs-civil-law/
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/library/robbins/CommonLawCivilLawTraditions.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
3) Look up what the expression "case law" means (not in reference to the Torah, but in reference to the American legal system)
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=148
Now, Jordan Hall, Marcus Pittman, and Joel McDurmon have all expressed disagreement with my thesis - and they are all talented brothers in Christ. But on this point they are wrong, and not just white shoes after Labor Day wrong - they are as wrong as putting a "Tribble" caption on a photo of an Ewok, as wrong as thinking that "RC" in RC Sproul stands for "Roman Catholic", and as wrong as Bruce Jenner's current restroom choices.
There are lots of good reasons to oppose the new precedent set by the Supreme Court, but they don't include the absurd notion that, because the decision is not legislation it is not law (the errant opinion expressed by Jordan and Marcus and defended by Joel).
So please, brothers. Stop it. Just stop it. The media get lots of things wrong all the time, but this is not one of those things. This is actually one of those rare cases where they've made an accurate statement.
-TurretinFan
Monday, September 28, 2015
1 comment:
Comment Guidelines:
1. Thanks for posting a comment. Without you, this blog would not be interactive.
2. Please be polite. That doesn't mean you have to use kid gloves, but please try not to flame others, even if they are heretics, infidels, or worse.
3. If you insult me, I'm more likely to delete your comment than if you butter me up. After all, I'm human. I prefer praise to insults. If you prefer insults, there's something wrong with you.
4. Please be concise. The comment box is not your blog. Your blog is your blog. If you have a really long comment, post it on your blog and post a short summary of it here.
5. Please don't just spam. It's one thing to be concise, it's another thing to simply use the comment box to advertise.
6. Please note, by commenting here, you are relinquishing your (C) in your comments to me.
7. Remember that you will give an account on judgment day for your words, including those typed in comment boxes. Try to write so you will not be ashamed if it is read back before the entire world.
8. Stay on topic. If your comment has nothing to do with the post, email it to me (my email can be obtained through my blogger profile), or simply don't post it.
9. Don't post as "Anonymous." If you are going to post anonymously, at least use some kind of recognizable "handle," so we can tell you apart from all the other anonymous folks. (This is moot at the moment, since recent abuse has forced me to turn off "anonymous" commenting.)
10. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; and abstain from doing to others what you would not wish upon yourself.
Well, I hope you have not blown a fuse or popped a cork TF? :)
ReplyDeleteThis is all so very interesting.
As I review the history of humanity and her attempts to create her own rules for living I come back to the Bible where we see time and time again a Biblical "stare decisis" approach to rules to live by and judges to rule by!
I was reading this morning from THE ROBBINS COLLECTION, School of Law, University of California, Berkeley. In their section on common law and civil law traditions one gets the sense there are two rails for the one track and two rails for the other.
What's interesting is to go over the philosophies of the Supreme Court Justices to see how they approach their lawmaking. It is equally and even more exhausting to see how the U.S. Congress goes about theirs, too.
The final Word, of course, is the Bible and such high genius as the following genius captured by the physician Luke in his writings, here:::>
Act 20:32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.
Or Paul's genius again here:::>
1Ti 1:5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.
1Ti 1:6 Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion,
1Ti 1:7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.
1Ti 1:8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
1Ti 1:9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers,
1Ti 1:10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
1Ti 1:11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
And of course, your genius as clear to me as it is when I read this blog post, especially here:
TF //There are lots of good reasons to oppose the new precedent set by the Supreme Court, but they don't include the absurd notion that, because the decision is not legislation it is not law ...().//.
All three branches of the U.S. Government have made legal precedent changes and now we have a Supreme Court that can't keep from keeping their white shoes on after Labor Day when we realize just how far off the rails their recent decisions are when one thinks about the Law of Christ that governed the Apostle Paul in the face of such evil as he writes about not from history books but from the insidious nature the Gospel was being preached into by him and the other Apostles and Prophets of his time. Of course we see the same trend with the Executive and the orders from that body and the Legislation that is proposed and defeated by arcane maneuvering on the part of both houses of Congress:::>
"...the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine!
For me the Apostle John makes the most sense when I am out and about as opposed to having someone come in for a meal and or a drink:::>
2Jn 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.
2Jn 1:10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting,
2Jn 1:11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.