The distinction of precedence has (or should have) no profound difference to a person's opinion of what constitutes validity or corruption, regardless of a stat

The distinction of precedence has (or should have) no profound difference to a person's opinion of what constitutes validity or corruption, regardless of a status quo. That is my point. There is only "profound difference" to the circular reasoning of law itself. There was no reason for me to address that. Legal frameworks are inherently rigid and without much individual conscience.