In an ideal judicial system, decision-making should occur as the result of the adherence to clear legal and ethical standards, the careful evaluation of any cases in which precedents were established, an assiduous interpretation of the law, and thorough consideration of the evidence provided by all of the parties involved in a legal proceeding. Judicial decision-making is usually far more complex, though. Even in those cases where there is a precedent that establishes the standards to take into account when rendering a verdict or a sentence, interpretation is subjective. Personal experiences, opinions, beliefs, and values will always come to bear, even if subtly, in the judicial decision-making process, whether admitted by the decision-making party or not.
One must also consider that, in extreme cases, judicial decision-making is influenced by underlying variables that are, quite simply, unethical. Whether for personal or professional advancement or the desire to retain political stature and allies in the profession, a judge’s decision may be influenced by special interests that have no place in a courtroom. Judges and juries do not make the law; they interpret it. Yet, interpreting the intentions of legislators can be a challenging task, even when the law appears to be straightforward, because there are numerous permutations in real life that a law could not have anticipated at the time of its passage.
In addition, although officials of the justice system are expected to be impartial and objective, and despite the fact that they may strive to fulfill this expectation of their offices, they are human. Therefore, judges and juries are fallible in their reasoning, evaluative capacities, and judgment. Judicial decision-making processes must also consider the potential repercussions of their actions. While there are several codes of ethics designed to prevent these situations, especially when judges have something personal at stake in a particular decision, there is always this factor to consider.
A judgment that is rendered is never occurring in a vacuum. The judicial decision-making entity must consider the impact that its decision will have upon future cases and on the very interpretation of the law. There is a definite cause and effect relationship with any judicial action and judges, particularly at the federal and state level, need to have a firm understanding of the possible implications that might occur when a precedent is set for a law. Finally, the decision-making body must be able to substantiate how it arrived at its decision, a check and balance that prevents abuse of the legal and judicial systems.
