3 ms·

> arbitrarily change the rules after it’s already made up its mind. It is often the precedent which was arbitrary.

Retric 3y ago
Sure, but that’s not an inherent issue. If things are arbitrary and you decide based on a coin flip then the coin flip needs to be binding or you just keep flipping coins. There’s many other systems we could use, but existing case law has the benefit of being extremely detailed. If navigable waterways in your state is public land, what happens after a dam is installed and they’re no longer navigable? That’s the kind of thing you want to find out before you buy some property.
- ralusek 3y ago
  An issue down to coin flips should be seen as a signal of a bug. However, I would argue that more often than not, it's not actually down to a coin flip. There is a default position in a liberal society, and that is that of minimal authority. Every legal question is fundamentally one of "does the state have the authority to do this, and if so, at what level?" If the answer is unclear, this should always resolve to no, or if yes, at the most localized level specified.
  - Retric 3y ago
    I edited the above comment for clarity so I don’t know if you saw it, but the benefit is allowing people to make decisions without court cases. Most legal questions aren’t about state power but what exactly the rule is. Contracts are a huge area that has little to do with the state. Even when stuff involves the state people want to know the legal/liability/tax implications of doing X vs Y before doing something. Ie: Do I need a permit to build an outdoor pizza oven? It doesn’t matter how arbitrarily the rule was created, you just want to know the rule and often the penalty for breaking it. Laws often use vague terms like “reasonable.” So, WTF is does “reasonable speed under the circumstances” actually mean in say light rain, well chances are someone found out …

Sure, but that’s not an inherent issue. If things are arbitrary and you decide based on a coin flip then the coin flip needs to be binding or you just keep flipping coins. There’s many other systems we could use, but existing case law has the benefit of being extremely detailed. If navigable waterways in your state is public land, what happens after a dam is installed and they’re no longer navigable? That’s the kind of thing you want to find out before you buy some property.

ralusek 3y ago
An issue down to coin flips should be seen as a signal of a bug. However, I would argue that more often than not, it's not actually down to a coin flip. There is a default position in a liberal society, and that is that of minimal authority. Every legal question is fundamentally one of "does the state have the authority to do this, and if so, at what level?" If the answer is unclear, this should always resolve to no, or if yes, at the most localized level specified.
- Retric 3y ago
  I edited the above comment for clarity so I don’t know if you saw it, but the benefit is allowing people to make decisions without court cases. Most legal questions aren’t about state power but what exactly the rule is. Contracts are a huge area that has little to do with the state. Even when stuff involves the state people want to know the legal/liability/tax implications of doing X vs Y before doing something. Ie: Do I need a permit to build an outdoor pizza oven? It doesn’t matter how arbitrarily the rule was created, you just want to know the rule and often the penalty for breaking it. Laws often use vague terms like “reasonable.” So, WTF is does “reasonable speed under the circumstances” actually mean in say light rain, well chances are someone found out …