Do US Judges Have to Follow Legal Precedents, and Why?

The principle of legal precedent in the United States legal system is a cornerstone of the common law tradition. It dictates that when a case is brought before a court, the judges will look at similar cases that have been decided in the past to help frame their decision. Understanding when and how judges are bound to follow these precedents is crucial for preserving the predictability and fairness of the legal system.

Understanding Legal Precedent

Legal precedent refers to the principle where courts are bound to follow the rulings of earlier cases with similar facts and issues. This principle is most commonly seen in courts located in common law jurisdictions, such as the United States. The purpose of this practice is to ensure that the law is applied consistently and predictably, thereby upholding fairness in the judicial process.

Lower courts, especially those beneath the Supreme Court, are expected to follow the precedent set by the higher courts. This requirement arises from the idea that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the law within the country, and lower courts must adhere to its decisions to maintain a coherent and stable legal framework.

Binding vs. Persuasive Precedent

In the United States, there are two types of precedent: binding and persuasive. Binding precedents are those established by higher courts, and subordinate courts are legally obligated to follow them.

Binding Precedent: When the Supreme Court or the highest court in a state establishes a precedent, lower courts must adhere to it. This is because the higher court is expected to have a fuller understanding of the issues and the facts of the case, making its decision more authoritative. Any decision that contradicts a binding precedent will likely be appealed, and the appellate court will review the decision for compliance with the higher court's precedent.

Persuasive Precedent: Persuasive precedents are those set by lower courts in other jurisdictions or by courts of the same level that do not have the power to bind the current court. While these precedents do not impose a legal obligation, judges may still choose to follow them if they believe it is appropriate. However, if a judge decides not to follow a persuasive precedent, this decision can also be appealed by the parties involved, and a higher court will be able to review the decision.

Exceptions to the Precedent Rule

It is possible for judges to deviate from precedent under certain circumstances. However, they must have a strong legal justification for doing so. For example, if the facts of the current case are significantly different from the facts in the precedent, the judge may be able to distinguish the case and avoid following the precedent. Nonetheless, the question of why the precedent should be deviated from remains a crucial element of judicial decision-making.

The Importance of Legal Precedents

A key advantage of the rule of law based on precedents is that individuals and businesses can anticipate the likely outcome of legal disputes based on how past cases were decided. This predictability is vital for maintaining a stable society where laws provide a clear framework for conduct.

The frequent changes in legal precedent at the highest court level are reflective of the changing nature of society and the interpretation of the law. Changes in precedent by the highest courts are often a result of advancements in social values, shifts in public opinion, or new interpretations of the Constitution.

Conclusion

In the United States, the requirement for judges to follow legal precedent is a crucial aspect of the common law system. While lower courts must follow binding precedents, persuasive precedents can also influence judicial decisions. Judges may deviate from precedent if they have a compelling reason to do so, but such deviations must be well-justified. Understanding how and when to follow precedents is essential for preserving the integrity and fairness of the legal system.

Additional Resources

To delve deeper into the topic of legal precedents, refer to the following resources:

Legal Precedent - Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute Legal Precedent - The Free Dictionary Preserving Precedent: Historical Precedents and Reasons for Deviations from Precedent