Responses need to be a minimum of one paragraph of substance in which you add to another student’s posting or clearly articulate (in a respectful manner) why you agree or disagree with the student’s opinion; this effort will result in a grade of “C.” You can improve your grade by responding (with substance) to multiple posts. Make sure your response is not simply a reiteration of your original post.
You can increase your grade with effort, even bring in outside sources (using citations), offer new insights, etc.
Respond to the following peers post:
Peer Name:Maryssa
The thoughtful use of discretion in applying the law can yield positive results. It requires careful consideration of the unique circumstances surrounding a case and the selection of the most appropriate course of action (Greene & Heilbrun, 2024). While the law provides guidance, justice is not always clear-cut. Discretion is particularly valuable in intricate cases where the law alone may not offer a clear resolution. As society evolves, there may be instances where existing laws do not align with societal norms (Tanzilulloh et al, 2024). In these situations, discretion can help bridge the gap between the law and society or between different legal statutes, ensuring fairness and harmony within the legal system. However, discretion should not be the sole basis for decision-making.
Different individuals may interpret the law, situation, or parties involved differently, leading to inconsistencies in legal rulings (Green & Heilbrun, 2024). In some cases, the use of discretion by decision-makers can be perceived as a threat to the judicial system (Tanzilulloh et al., 2024). Biases and preconceptions can impact decisions and negatively affect certain groups of people under the law (Greene & Heilbrun, 2024). Overly sympathetic decision-makers may make decisions based on emotions rather than the law, and personal beliefs can interfere with decision-making responsibilities in the judicial system. Those in positions of authority must prioritize upholding the law and only employ discretion when necessary.
Greene, E., & Heilbrun, K. (2024). Wrightsman’s Psychology and the Legal System (10th ed.). Cengage.
Tanzilulloh, M. I., Hartiwiningsih, H., & Rustamaji, M. (2024, February). Understanding Judicial Discretion: A Comparative Study of Judges’ Legal Reasoning in Civil Law and Common Law Jurisdictions. In International Conference on Law, Economic & Good Governance (IC-LAW 2023) (pp. 551-556). Atlantis Press.
Maryssa makes a compelling argument regarding the importance of discretion in applying the law, particularly in cases where the law alone may not offer a clear resolution or may not align with societal norms. I agree that discretion can be valuable in such circumstances, helping to bridge gaps and ensure fairness and harmony within the legal system. However, I also agree that discretion should not be the sole basis for decision-making. As Maryssa pointed out, the subjective nature of discretion can lead to inconsistencies in legal rulings and may even pose a threat to the integrity of the judicial system if not used judiciously.
The reference to biases and preconceptions impacting decisions is particularly relevant. Studies have shown that implicit biases can significantly influence decision-making processes, including those within the legal system. According to a report by the American Bar Association, biases based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other factors can lead to unequal treatment under the law, undermining the principle of justice for all. Therefore, while discretion can be a useful tool, it must be exercised with caution and with a commitment to upholding the principles of fairness, impartiality, and the rule of law.