4 ms·

That's because we live in a common law country. Of course most of the relevant bits will be case law.

by xxpor 6y ago

pdonis 6y ago
Case law is not supposed to make new laws. It's only supposed to apply existing law to the facts of particular cases. That has to be done because no written statute can specify how it would apply to all possible combinations of facts. But there's still a difference between applying a statute to particular facts, and making new law that goes beyond anything the statute says or implies. I am certainly not the only one to believe that many court decisions since the passage of landmark civil rights laws in the 1960s have done the latter, not the former.
- xxpor 6y ago
  No, they make new law all the damn time. For example, there's is no written definition of murder in Michigan. Look it up if you don't believe me. I can't cite a link, because there's nothing to cite. The penalties are in statutes, but the actual definition isn't. It's illegal because it's just assumed that it is and courts have made the definition through case law. It's become less necessary to cite over time for obvious reasons, but court decisions from England from before 1776 are still valid opinions to cite in American courts as the source of law as well.
  - pdonis 6y ago
    > they make new law all the damn time I know they do, but they're not supposed to. That's the point I was making. See below. > there's is no written definition of murder in Michigan Yes, that's true of many common law crimes in many States. And where those common law crimes existed before any of the US States were formed, those States often continue to accept the common law definitions of the crimes, as developed over centuries of Anglo-American case law. That's not what I am saying is a problem. What I am saying is a problem is when there is a statute that makes specific law, but courts then "interpret" things into the statute that were never there and never intended to be there by the legislature that passed the statute.

That's because we live in a common law country. Of course most of the relevant bits will be case law.

by xxpor 6y ago

That's because we live in a common law country. Of course most of the relevant bits will be case law.

Case law is not supposed to make new laws. It's only supposed to apply existing law to the facts of particular cases. That has to be done because no written statute can specify how it would apply to all possible combinations of facts. But there's still a difference between applying a statute to particular facts, and making new law that goes beyond anything the statute says or implies. I am certainly not the only one to believe that many court decisions since the passage of landmark civil rights laws in the 1960s have done the latter, not the former.

xxpor 6y ago
No, they make new law all the damn time. For example, there's is no written definition of murder in Michigan. Look it up if you don't believe me. I can't cite a link, because there's nothing to cite. The penalties are in statutes, but the actual definition isn't. It's illegal because it's just assumed that it is and courts have made the definition through case law. It's become less necessary to cite over time for obvious reasons, but court decisions from England from before 1776 are still valid opinions to cite in American courts as the source of law as well.
- pdonis 6y ago
  > they make new law all the damn time I know they do, but they're not supposed to. That's the point I was making. See below. > there's is no written definition of murder in Michigan Yes, that's true of many common law crimes in many States. And where those common law crimes existed before any of the US States were formed, those States often continue to accept the common law definitions of the crimes, as developed over centuries of Anglo-American case law. That's not what I am saying is a problem. What I am saying is a problem is when there is a statute that makes specific law, but courts then "interpret" things into the statute that were never there and never intended to be there by the legislature that passed the statute.