You’re not a lawyer, are you? Case law is the very foundation of Anglo-American jurisprudence.
Nope. But time and time again we see judges relying on “case law” to shoe-horn a politically correct decision to fit a given case. This has created, not even a ratchet effect, but a morphing effect whereby an explicit prohibition turns into a job function, infringements become legal, and private Rights overturned for Unicorn farts/public good.
Each case, and each law, should be given it’s day in court on it’s own merits and facts. If 30 cases are resolved the same way, fine. But if the 31st doesn’t quite fit, should they be doomed just because a judge relies on “case law”?
Now compound that issue back to reconstruction and if you are unbiased, you’ll see the enormity of the problem and why we can no longer count on the courts to “save us” from bad laws...
You are probably right - very few understand the problem with case law. Specifically “Stare Decisis” (everyone google that term and be aware of this problem child made of legal custom that is not enshrined in the constitution, but is agreed to by those in the profession, i.e. our rulers).
This bit of insanity means you are stuck under bad case law, as well as good, so as not to rock the boat. This is why the IRS can seize your goods before you are convicted. This is why FDR’s packing of the supreme court to then wildly re-interpret the interstate commerce clause has led to the bloated FedGov we know today.
Yes know the bad part of common law. There is good, but stare decisis is lately the creature of lawyers and tyrants.