Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Actually that isn't particularly accurate in the US system of justice. The trial judge's opinion usually has very little influence. A lot of people don't understand how the appellate system works in the US. Frequently, the dissenting opinions in an appellate court has a lot more influence than the majority decision. This is because dissenting opinions tend to be more open and to the point, while majority decisions tend to be rather bland. Scalia was best known for his dissenting opinions.
|
By definition, aren't the dissenting opinions less influencing: the person expressing the dissenting opinion didn't agree the majority, and the majority are what decides whether the verdict stands. Especially in your Scalia reference (I assume for the SCOTUS), this is the highest level, so his opinion wouldn't be considered by any higher appeals court, and in fact, a precedent has been set for the entire U.S. legal system?