Judicial precedent basically means the process with which judges follow previously decided cases whose fact are of adequate similarity. As a practice of the court, the doctrine of judicial precedent provides direction to judges when they are applying case precedents. Moreover, this practice provides clarity, certainty and consistency in the application of case precedents by judges. In practice, judicial precedent is used as a source for future decision making since it's considered as a rule for judges to decide on like cases in a similar manner. As a result, the doctrine of judicial precedent provides predictability in the law (Tufal, n.d.).
Principles of Judicial Precedent:

As a practice in the courts, the doctrine of judicial precedent involves two major principles which are

Stare Decisis:

As the first principle of judicial precedent, stare decisis means to stand by what is decided implying that lower courts are bound to follow the legal principles that were established…...

mla

References:

"Advantages and Disadvantages of the Doctrine of Judicial Precedent." Sixth Form Law.

Retrieved April 30, 2011, from  http://sixthformlaw.info/01_modules/mod2/2_1_1_precedent_mechanics/08_precedent_advantages_dis.htm 

Bovington, L. (2010, April). Dr. Peter Jepsons. Retrieved April 30, 2011, from  http://www.peterjepson.com/law/LAS-8%20Bovington.pdf 

"In Practice the Doctrine of Precedent Does Not Contain Judicial Decision Making." (n.d.). The

Judicial Appointments
Bush's Judicial Appointments

An Examination of President George W. Bush's Judicial Appointments

During the eight years of his presidency George W. Bush appointed two Supreme Court justices, 61 Appeals Court judges, and 261 Federal District Court judges. Judicial appointments can be one of a president's longest lasting legacies. The people President Bush named to the judiciary will be making decisions and affecting policy long after he leaves office. Courts today, especially the Supreme Court and appeals courts, make policy that has just as much of an impact on Americans' lives as do the laws that Congress passes. President Bush recognized this fact and took his power to appoint judges very seriously.

According to Christopher Miles (2010) it is hard to know exactly how the nomination process worked in the White House because those involved in the process have remained relatively silent; however some details have come to light. In the Bush administration,…...

mla

References

American University (2009, July 10) George W. Bush's appointments emphasized ideology over diversity. Newswise. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from  http://www.newswise.com/articles/george-w-bushs-court-appointments-emphasized-ideology-over-diversity 

Biskupic, J. (2008, March 14). Bush's conservatism to live long in the U.S. courts. USA Today. USATODAY.com. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from  http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-13-judges_N.htm 

Eggen, D. (2008, October 7). Bush stresses judicial nominations. The Washington post. Washingtonpost.com. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2008/10/06/AR2008100602851.html 

Miles, C. (2010). Cases and controversies: George W. Bush's appeals court nominations. Student pulse academic journal. 2.06. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from  http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/255/cases-and-controversies-george-w-bushs-appeals-court-nominations

Judicial Interpretation Theory
Judges draft no legislation, but they create law nevertheless, through their powers of judicial interpretation. Judges determine the outcome of particular cases by interpreting the meaning of a single phrase, and sometimes, a single word within the applicable statute. By creating legal precedents, jurists sometimes decide entire lines of future cases merely by how they choose to interpret a single word, or to resolve a singe apparent ambiguity in the language of a statute.

American judges have developed numerous "canons" of jurisprudence that are supposed to operate as rules against arbitrary interpretation, such as:

The expression of one thing constitutes the exclusion of others."

Statutes that change the common law must be strictly construed."

Penal statutes must be construed narrowly to protect the accused."

Legislative intent in penal law must be found in the language actually used in the statutes."(Carter p.67)

egardless of any rules or principles of statutory construction or judicial interpretation, it…...

mla

References

Carter, L.H. Reason in Law (1979) Little Brown & Co.

Haskell, P.G. Why Lawyers Behave as They Do (1998) Westview Press

Kutler, S.I. The Supreme Court and The Constitution: Readings in American

Constitutional History (1984) W.W. Norton & Co.

Original Post
Blackstone initially set the precedent, so to speak, for English common law. English common law became the foundation for American common law, which values judicial precedent over statutes. Many European countries in fact use statutes over legal precedents as the means by which to determine legality, distinguishing the Anglo-American system from others. Blackstone indicated, “that precedents and rules be followed, unless flatly absurd or unjust; for though their reason be not obvious at first view, yet we owe such a deference to former times,” something that has become so entrenched in American judicial practices that it is sometimes taken for granted. Courts of final appeal, like the Supreme Court and the supreme courts of states, will tend towards upholding status quo unless there is a clear and decisive reason why a new precedent should be established. Their decisions will be based on several factors: the merits of the original…...

Judicial Philosophy of the Supreme Court
Judicial philosophy is a concept that refers to the way judges understand and interpret the law in relation to the specific cases they are handling. This concept emerges from the fact that while laws are universal and broad, they need to be applied to specific cases based on the judge's understanding and interpretation of the law as well as the unique circumstances surrounding the case. The two most common judicial philosophies of the Supreme Court are judicial activism and judicial restraint, which have influenced various cases including Gore vs. Bush (2000) and Obergefell vs. Hodges (2015). Judicial activism refers to a philosophy in which judges depart from conventional precedents to adopt new, progressive social policies whereas judicial restraint is a philosophy in which judges limit the exercise of their own authority (Bendor, 2011).

Judicial activism of the Supreme Court influenced cases like Gore vs. Bush (2000)…...

Living Constitutionalism
As the leader of the free world, the United States remains in the limelight as the rest of the world keeps a keen eye on how they conduct their affairs. As it appertains to constitutional interpretation, the U.S. has a sound philosophy dubbed 'living constitutionalism.' In the American constitutional dispensation, as in other countries, the letter of the law is unequivocal. That notwithstanding, many agree that every society is dynamic in nature. As such, as society keeps changing, there is a growing need for the constitution to be equally as dynamic in view of various considerations. Implementing and enforcing the letter of the law as stated in constitutional clauses often has its shortcomings. The concept 'Living Constitutionalism' revolves around humanizing the law. By adding the element of humanity in the law, the constitution gains a dynamic element. This idea relates to the view of the society as contemporaneous, which…...

mla

References List

Alstyne, William Van. 2010. "Clashing Visions of a "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists and Obligationists." Cato Supreme Court Review 13-26.

Balkin, Jack M. 2012. "Panelist Papers: The Roots of the Living Constitution." Boston University Law Review 92, 4:1129-1160.

Denning, Brannon P. 2011. "Common Law Constitutional Interpretation: A Critique." Constitutional Commentary 27, 3:621-645.

Dodson, Scott. 2008. "A Darwinist View of the Living Constitution." Vanderbilt Law Review 61, 5:1319-1347.

As Waldron (2009) emphasizes in an article entitled, The Concept of the Rule of law, the rule of law
... is invoked whenever we criticize governments that are trying to get their way by arbitrary and oppressive action or by short-circuiting the procedures laid down in a country's laws or constitution. Interfering with the courts, jailing someone without legal justification, detaining people without due process, manipulating the constitution for partisan advantage -- all these actions are seen as abuses of the Rule of Law.

In other words, the rule of law provides the normative structure that gives stability to the society. Therefore, deviations from the norms of the rule of law threaten the structure of a democratic society. Consequently, such deviations are only appropriate in the most exceptional of circumstances.

As the author of the above article states,

The Rule of Law is violated...when the norms that are applied by officials do not…...

mla

Sykes A 2002, The 'Rule Of Law' As An Australian Constitutionalist Promise, viewed May 31, 2011, <  http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v9n1/sykes91.html >

Sykes A 2002, The 'Rule Of Law' As An Australian Constitutionalist Promise, viewed May 31, 2011, <

For example, the Parliament passed the "Year and a Day ule" Act in 1996 that changed the previous murder and manslaughter law that specified that a person could be charged with murder or manslaughter if the victim died within a year and a day of receiving his injuries. The change was made to reflect modern development in medical science, which enabled injured people to remain alive for longer periods.
Changes in the UK laws have also reflected the growing strength of the egalitarian ideal over the last two centuries. It has led to changes in laws that have encouraged the gradual emancipation of married women and the prohibition of discrimination based on race or sex. For instance, an old law applicable until recently did not allow married women to refuse sex with her husband. However, in . v (1991), the House of Lords decided that if a wife did…...

mla

References

Atiyah, P.S. (1995). Law and Modern Society (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press

Harris, P. (2007). An Introduction to Law (7th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

Martin, J (2005). The English Legal System (4th ed.). London, UK: Hodder Arnold

Lord Justice Coke described customs as "one of the main triangles of the laws of England" (Martin, 14). Others dispute this theory and contend most of the "customs" were in fact invented by the judges themselves.

The text by Neville & Lokuge (2006) reports to the evolving status of this question since the rash of birth defects caused in the 1970s by the Thalidomide drug. These events would give way to what Neville & Lokuge call a 'novel' legal question. Its novelty, the article suggests, may be the primary reason that courts of have decided with inconsistency how best to address 'wrongful life' and 'wrongful birth' cases. Accordingly, the article reports that "courts have endeavoured to be careful in recognising and awarding damages in novel areas of law, such as "wrongful birth" and "wrongful life." The High Court of Australia has recently given judgment in both kinds of action: in 2003 allowing a claim for wrongful birth (Cattanach v Melchior), but in May 2006 disallowing two separate claims for wrongful life (Harriton v Stephens and aller v James/aller v Hoolahan)." (Neville & Lokuge, 559)
The research…...

mla

Works Cited:

Blake, R. (2002). Abortions and Actions for Wrongful Life. University of the South Pacific.

Caldwell, J. (2004). The Legal Status of Abortion in Australia. Australian Reproductive Health Alliance.

Case Notes. (2002). Edwards v Blomeley; Harriton v Stephens; Waller v James: Wrongful Life Actions in Australia. Melbourne University Law Review, 37.

Neville, W.J. & Lokuge, B. (2006). Wrongful life claims: dignity, disability and "a line in the sand." Medicine and the Law, 185(10), 558-560.

adults have an episode or two from their youth of which they are not extremely proud. Perhaps it involved sneaking a beer (or several beers) at a social function, or lying about one's plans for the evening to get permission to attend a questionable event. Most kids have learned the hard way on at least a few experiences -- speeding, missing curfew, or cheating on a test. Younger children are taught that taking a pack of gum from the store without paying for it is wrong, and that there are certain words on television that they shouldn't repeat in school. e accept these facts of life fairly easily; minors aren't mentally or socially equipped to know how they should behave all of the time. Children have to be taught about social mores, and teenagers test authority without considering the consequences in a way that most adults would. Lawbreaking --…...

mla

Works Cited

Primary

Atkins v. Virginia, 2004, 536 U.S. 304

Case 12-285, Inter-American Court on Human Rights Rep. No 3/87 (1987)

Domingues v. State, 961 P. 2d 1279,1280, Nev. 1989

How does a court system cope with a “changing of the guard” when a new administration is elected and key executives and managers are replaced, and/or when policy changes direction as a new political party assumes power?
The best coping technique is instituting a system characterized by power separation. Accountability may be attained within the domain of administrative rulemaking by means of various institutional plans and practices. One may perceive bureaucratic accountability to be a classic agent-principal issue. Governmental cabinets, rather than parliaments, form the main bureaucratic controllers, being ideally positioned, owing to their central location in administration as well as legislative politics, to guarantee that implementation will be governed by the very political agenda that drives lawmaking. Ministerial workers are answerable, via a hierarchical command chain, to the Prime Minister, other ministers, the cabinet, and a coalition or the majority party. Thus, whilst drafting regulations, the very politicians responsible for…...

The Da Costa ruling, however, determined that any ruling of the European Court of Justice must necessarily apply to all national courts when interpreting Community Law (Craig 2001). In this way, the law is guaranteed to be applied evenly in and in the same manner in all member nation courts when deciding Community Law issues, whereas prior to this ruling differing interpretations of the same facets of Community Law could be applied to the same issue.
It is important to note that this ruling does not affect the various national courts of the member nations of the European Union when interpreting national law, and in fact the European Union and its various courts, including the European Court of Justice, have no sway over such interpretations, as the European Union is not a true federal entity (Craig 2001). In this way, while ensuring the equitable interpretation of Community Law in all…...

mla

References

Craig, P. (2001). "The jurisdiction of the community courts reconsidered." In the European Court of justice, de Burca & Weiler, eds. New York: Oxford University Press.

Freestone, D. & Davidson, S. (1988). The institutional framework of the European Communities. new York: Oxford University Press.

Slapper, G. & Kelly, D. (2006). The English legal system. New York: Routledge.

Global Criminology: Similarities and Differences Between Adversarial and Inquisitorial Justice Systems
Similarities and Differences between Adversarial and Inquisitorial Justice Systems: Global Criminology

Every country uses fundamental rules and procedures to ensure fairness and justice in its legal system. The effectiveness of any legal system is assessed based on how well it facilitates truth-finding, efficiency, and fairness. This text assesses the effectiveness of adversarial and inquisitorial justice systems to determine which one would be more effective in fighting global crime.

Similarities and Differences between Adversarial and Inquisitorial justice systems

Every country uses fundamental rules and procedures to ensure fairness and justice in its legal system. Based on these rules, a country can be termed as either adversarial or inquisitorial. Experts have given diverse views on the effectiveness of either system in achieving the aims of a country's legal traditions. This insight is crucial for the interpretation of the Constitution, as well as for purposes of…...

mla

References

Ambos, K. (2003). International Criminal Procedure: Adversarial, Inquisitorial or Mixed? International Criminal Law Review, 3(1), 1-37.

Dakolias, M. (2014). Court Performance around the World: A Comparative Perspective. Yale Human Rights and Development Journal, 2(1), 87-144.

Dammer, H. R., Fairchild, E. & Albanese, S. J. (2006). Comparative Criminal Justice System. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.

Doak, J., McGourlay, C. & Thomas, M. (2015). Evidence in Context (4th ed.). Third Avenue, NY: Routledge.

Legal Concept of elevant Evidence
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)

Facts: Defendants Brady and Boblit were convicted of murder by the state of Maryland, with Brady admitting participation in the crime but stating that Boblit committed the actual act of killing the victim. Boblit confirmed this fact in a written statement recording his personal confession, but during the criminal proceedings prosecutors elected to withhold Boblit's confession from the court, as well as from Brady and his attorney. Upon being convicted of the murder, Brady challenged the decision on the basis of potential violations of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees those accused of criminal conduct the right to due process. The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed Brady's conviction, but remanded the case for retrial to reassess the question of punishment.

Issues: The prosecution's choice to withhold Boblit's written confession irrevocably altered the sentencing process for Brady, as the court was never made…...

mla

References

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)

With respect to sexual harassment claims of the quid pro quo nature, one of the most important elements of modern sexual harassment principles establishes specific vicarious liability on the part of employers for failure on the part of management to redress any complaints of sexual harassment by employees (Friedman, 2005).
In 2003, Courtney Price, an employee of the New York angers organization of the NHL sued the angers and their parent organization, Madison Square Garden, after she was fired for warning a fellow employee that a public relations executive within the organization had solicited her for sexual favors. In that case, the employer could have avoided liability by following up on the matter as soon as it came to light and disciplining the executive (Sandomir, 20071).

Instead, when the organization learned that the plaintiff had warned her coworkers to stay away from the executive in question and that her warning included…...

mla

References

Crouse, K. (2007). Browne Sanders Is an Inspiration After Winning a Lawsuit. The New York Times; November 4, 2007. Dershowitz, a. (2002). Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age. New York: Little Brown & Co.

Finn, R. (2007). A Warrior in the Sexual Harassment Battle. The New York Times; October 26, 2007.

Friedman, L.M. (2005). A History of American Law. New York: Touchstone.

Halbert, T., Ingulli, E. (2008) Law & Ethics in the Business Environment. Cincinnati, OH: West Legal Studies.

1. The Jurisprudential analysis of Sierra Leones Cybercrime Act highlights the importance of legal principles and reasoning in interpreting and applying the law in the context of digital offenses.

2. By examining the Cybercrime Act through a jurisprudential lens, one can better understand the underlying philosophy and values that inform the legislation, shedding light on the intended legal outcomes and societal impacts.

3. Jurisprudential analysis helps to clarify the scope and limitations of the Cybercrime Act in Sierra Leone, allowing for a deeper exploration of the legal rights and responsibilities of individuals in the digital realm.

4. Through jurisprudential examination,....

1. The impact of international laws and court decisions on internet jurisdiction is a complex and evolving issue that has far-reaching implications for the regulation and governance of cyberspace. With the proliferation of online activities across borders and the increasing interconnectedness of the global community, questions of jurisdiction have become paramount in determining how legal disputes arising from online transactions or activities are resolved. International laws and court decisions play a crucial role in shaping the framework within which internet jurisdiction is established, influencing the allocation of regulatory authority among different countries and setting precedents for resolving conflicts that transcend....