This chapter asks what guidance rules judges might use to implement the moderate rule defended thus far (individual policy) The discussion shifts from objective appraisal rules to subjective guidance rules. The chapter responds to Alan H. Goldman’s objections to rules that permit judges sometimes to deviate in suboptimal-result cases, as they attempt to optimize. The chapter defends guidance rules that permit each judge to deviate in a certain percentage of the suboptimal-result cases that she decides over the course of her career. It also defends two priority rules for judges. The first rule assigns deviation priority to cases based on how suboptimal the legally required results are. The second rule assigns priority to suboptimal-rule cases over gap cases. The chapter also defends a default rule that permits judges, after they obey the priority rules, to use any morally permissible criteria as the basis for their selection of suboptimal-result cases for deviation. Finally, it addresses the question of how confident a judge must be that a result is suboptimal before deviation is warranted.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.