An interesting question. Similarly if a court ruled Pi is '3', the moon doesn't exist, or that atoms are in fact "pixie dust".So, if a court determines (and subsequent appeals affirm) that the earth is flat, then the earth is flat?
I disagree. I don't believe there are many adherents to the view that if a court rules the earth is flat then it makes it so - though I am sure that would depend on how "flat" were defined.There is a term for this POV (and don't get me wrong, it has lots of adherents): legal positivism.
It should also be noted that rulings only apply to what the legal position within a legal framework is considered to be. It doesn't exclude a contrary belief, though acts in accordance with contrary beliefs may be prohibited and punished.
It would for example be rather pointless to rule that murder is a crime and then not hold people accountable for any murder they are judged to have committed.
The principle that "courts make a ruling and, once appeals are exhausted, it becomes a reality" is what society has collectively accepted as a guiding principle since time immemorial. That's why that POV has so many adherents.But it is a POV that doesn't have much place in a supposedly technical forum, such as this one claims to be.
I would argue it's "courts don't get to decide" that doesn't have a place in a technical forum, and argument they shouldn't would be best kept for forums focused on philosophical debate. Holding to such a view might even be best kept to oneself outside such forums and private gatherings.
Statistics: Posted by hippy — Sat Mar 08, 2025 3:11 pm