Difference Between A Binding Precedent And A Persuasive Precedent

741 Words3 Pages
2. Explain the difference between a binding precedent and a persuasive precedent?
Within the United States, the judicial system follows the principle of stare decisis. Whereas, courts should abide by the precedents established by superior courts” (Berman, Bowman, West, & Van Wart, 2016, p. 56). The apex of the judicial system, within the United States, is the Supreme Court followed by the 12 federal circuit courts and the 90 federal district courts providing the base of the federal judicial system. States follow a similar pyramid structure (Berman et al., 2016, p. 56).
The principle of stare decisis is generally followed by the levels of the judicial system. Court’s opinions may be based on either binding or persuasive precedents. An opinion is considered a binding or controlling precedent if it has been written by a court in a higher position within the pyramid structure. Therefore, a precedent written by a federal circuit court should be abided by the federal district court directly below it on the pyramid but not by the Supreme Court which is located above it on the pyramid. However, a court may treat the opinion as a persuasive precedent in which they “choose to embrace a well-reasoned, nonbinding opinion” (Berman et al., 2016, p. 56). Therefore, the judge or judges may view the opinion as having no precedent over the case and are non-binding but provides consideration and guidance for the current case.
3. What is the Hatch Act?
It was not uncommon during the 1800s for
Get Access