Mr. Sirota offers quite a bit to chew on in just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must generally apply the law as written and should work to foster
stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the
changing will
of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the
circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedents.
(i) the
circumstances of a person for whose benefit the order was made have so
changed (including the person entering into a
stable and continuing de facto relationship); or