Jonathan SwiftJonathan Swift, (1667-1745) Irish author

Jonathan Swift Quote

“It is a maxim among lawyers that whatever hath been done before may be done again, and therefore they take special care to record all the decisions formerly made against common justice and the general reason of mankind. These, under the name of precedents, they produce as authorities to justify the most iniquitous opinions, and the judges never fail of directing them accordingly.”

Jonathan SwiftJonathan Swift
~ Jonathan Swift

Gulliver’s Travels, 1726

Ratings and Comments

Joe, Rochester, MI

Going to court does not equal justice!

c nuggin, Lincoln

This thought holds true to the current distruction of our Consitution

Mike, Norwalk

We hold this truth to be self evident, being proved over, and over, and over again. At best, 'Stare Decisis' should be used only as an immaterial offering to show earlier thought on the subject. At law, the jury is to determine fact and law at each situation.

watchman 13, USA

Precedents do build a foundation for thought, otherwise you must break ground again. Divining of the law is a very old precedent , I do like your point of view Mike. Even as the apostle Paul states in the first book to the Corinthians concerning judgment. 6 : 4, If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are lest esteemed in the church. A jury, Considering this nation as a whole, being the church. Quite the precedent to draw from for inspiration.

jim k, Austin, Tx

True in the 1700 hundreds as well as today.

Mike, Norwalk

watchman 13, it is your "otherwise you must break ground again", that really is the foundation of a free people ("If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson). For a jury to offer a civil settlement or justice in criminal matters, they must first know what is law (as per your Cor 6:4 reference - the laws of nature and of nature's God) and the subject act's facts pertaining to the related law (inclusive of intent; and, by way of 2 or 3 witnesses being a more whole understanding) 'Stare decisis' should merely be an historical look at earlier logic, reasoning and understanding for an administration of justice in a specific case, having no binding effect on the present (the previous did not define or bind the static law, the current parties' intent or otherwise facts). Each individual case needs judge the applicable code, ordinance, regulation, rule, statute, etc. as well as the subject being and situation. Judicial precedence (stare decisis) is a slippery slope of judicial legislation, it being greater than legislation from legislators.

Mike, Norwalk

Judicial precedence (exponentially legislating law and justice out of de jure administration's existence), more than any other topic of action, has eliminated a free representative republic of individual sovereigns with inalienable right(s) - a united We The People. The occupying statist theocracy infesting this land, complete with its executive, legislative and media branches of administrative tyranny, supports fully, despotism's stare decisis.

E Archer, NYC

It's called legislating from the bench. Jury trials are rare, and informed jurors even rarer. As the bumper sticker goes, "Question Authority."


Get a Quote-a-Day!

Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box daily.