3 ms·
It's more like they use motivated reasoning to reach the desired outcome and then backfill the legal rationale as best they can.
by DangitBobby 1y ago
It's more like they use motivated reasoning to reach the desired outcome and then backfill the legal rationale as best they can.
- krapp 1y agoGiven that ghosts aren't real, it's the same difference.
- boroboro4 1y agoI kinda agree on overall sentiment but it’s important to write it down: we went from 1. Court doing legislation by making decision on important topics, coming with reasoning, mostly building on previous reasoning and gradually changing things 2. Court makes a decision and then just build up a reasoning to support it, sometimes completely off 3. Court makes a decision without reasoning at all I think 1 is reasonable, with 2 being bad and 3 being ugly.