Politics, public opinions and interest groups are among the factors that influence the decision making process of judiciary. With regard to Attorney Joe Smith case, there are numerous advantages that are associated with his professional relationship with judges. One of the advantages that can be accorded to Joe is the failure of the counsel to appear in court making it intentional to postpone the case. Secondly, as a result of Joe’s professional relationship with the judge, he may argue that the respondent or the petitioner require legal counsel which prompt the judge to grant him permission for the same.
In the legal profession, the legal subculture is instrumental as it is concerned with various practices and rules that guide the whole decision making process. Adherence to precedence is a legal subculture that influence decision making. According to the USLEGAL (2017), the law emphasizes that judges should obey the set precedents that were formed earlier. The greatest strength of the subculture is the enforcement of laws that are stable by ensuring that right and security of persons is upheld. Contrary, the legal subculture also have a weakness which encourages cases to be followed later after the ruling. It poses a challenge since the case may have been ruled in favor of another because of personal issues or influences of politics.
Furthermore, the other legal subculture that contribute to making of decisions in the legal profession is the nature of legal reasoning (Levi, 2013). The utilization of logic or the reasoning concept done by arguing to establish reasons. With regard to the nature of reasoning, the weakness noted is deductive reasoning which may result to the case being called off as a result of insufficient or no evidence.
References
Levi, E. H. (2013). An introduction to legal reasoning. University of Chicago Press.
USLEGAL, (2017).Doctrine of precedent law and legal definition. Retrieved from https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/doctrine-of-precedent/
