9.8k views
1 vote
Because there is one correct answer to every legal question, interpretations of law are well-settled. Therefore, there is no need for lawyers to argue other possible interpretations of primary sources of law. a)True b) False

User Sonny Boy
by
8.7k points

1 Answer

3 votes

Final answer:

False. Interpretations of law are not always well-settled. Lawyers play a crucial role in presenting and arguing different interpretations of primary sources of law.

Step-by-step explanation:

False. Interpretations of law are not always well-settled because legal cases may involve different interpretations and arguments based on the specific facts and the applicable laws. Lawyers play a crucial role in presenting and arguing different interpretations of primary sources of law in order to persuade the court and advocate for their client's position. Precedents and legal principles do provide guidance, but they do not completely eliminate the need for lawyers to argue other possible interpretations.

Joseph Story's perspective that the Constitution should not be interpreted based on the changing passions of times but through formal amendments illustrates the ongoing debate about the role of judicial interpretation versus textualism.

User Vozaldi
by
7.0k points