> those decisions must be grounded on actual text
Uhm, no — “precedent” is a judicial decision which may not be grounded on any text whatsoever. It’s a common thing in Common law, and of course it doesn’t exist in Continental law.
Uhm, no — “precedent” is a judicial decision which may not be grounded on any text whatsoever. It’s a common thing in Common law, and of course it doesn’t exist in Continental law.
Well when your job is to interpret the constitution, it should be grounded on the text. That's why there are textualist who disagree with your interpretation of the role of the court. It is supposed to be the foundation.