Quote:
Originally Posted by John F
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?
|
Actually not, the influence is on those law students and judges who read the dissent and consider the arguments. The influence is in the direction future rulings go. Scalia's major influence was in pushing the idea that rulings should be based on the clear written text of the law rather than on perceived intent or goal of the legislation in question.