If one judge interperets a law in a manner that pardons a person in 2011, a different judge ruling on the same type of case in 2020:
A)must absolutely abide by the 2011 interpretation
B)can site the 211 case as a model for the 2020 ruling
C)can disregard the 2011 decision only if the law changed
D)can overturn the 2011 decision if 5 years have passed.
I am clueless please help?
In this scenario, there are a few considerations to keep in mind. The answer will depend on the legal system in question, as different jurisdictions may have different rules. However, I can provide a general explanation of the options based on common legal practices.
A) Must absolutely abide by the 2011 interpretation: Generally, judges are not necessarily bound by earlier judicial interpretations unless they are bound by precedent. Precedent refers to the principle that courts should follow previous court decisions that are similar in legal issues and facts. If the 2011 case set a binding precedent, then the 2020 judge would be required to follow it. But if it was not a binding precedent, the judge can consider other factors, such as changes in the law or new interpretations.
B) Can cite the 2011 case as a model for the 2020 ruling: Even if the 2011 case is not a binding precedent, it can still be used as a persuasive precedent. Judges often consider previous cases to inform their decisions. The 2020 judge could use the reasoning and interpretation from the 2011 case to support their decision in a similar case. However, they are not obligated to follow it.
C) Can disregard the 2011 decision only if the law changed: If the law has changed since the 2011 case, the 2020 judge may have different legal grounds to interpret the law. In this case, the judge could disregard the 2011 decision and base their ruling on the current law.
D) Can overturn the 2011 decision if 5 years have passed: Normally, the passage of time alone does not justify overturning a previous decision. If the 2020 judge believes that the 2011 decision was incorrect or no longer valid, they would need to provide legal reasoning for their decision. Simply relying on the passage of five years would not be enough.
Ultimately, the specific circumstances, legal system, and applicable laws will determine which of these options is correct. It is always best to consult with legal professionals or reference applicable statutes and case law to determine the exact implications in a given situation.