This can be contrasted with common law systems whose intellectual framework comes from judge - made decisional law which gives
precedential authority to prior court decisions on the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions.
Taken together, the analysis in this Comment suggests that the justifications most commonly offered in defense of stare decisis — rule of law, appearance of the rule of law, and deference to legislative
authority — do not support affording binding
precedential value to secret opinions of the kind sometimes issued by the FISA courts.61