Final answer:
Conflict of interest and subordination of judgment both compromise impartiality in decision-making, potentially leading to distorted justice due to personal interests or external pressures on judgment.
Step-by-step explanation:
The main similarity between conflict of interest and subordination of judgment is that both ethical dilemmas involve a compromise of impartiality and can lead to a distortion of justice or decision-making. In situations where conflict of interest is present, an individual or group may be influenced by their own personal interests, while in the subordination of judgment, an individual's ability to assess a situation fairly can be compromised by external factors such as pressure, bias, or a lack of independence. Furthermore, doctrines like stare decisis help maintain consistency in judicial decisions, but as with cases of conflict of interest and subordination of judgment, can be complicated by changing interpretations and external pressures.
Both scenarios inherently undermine the moral obligation to act impartially, emphasizing the critical role judgment plays in the pursuit of justice and equity, a point vividly discussed in the passages provided. Whether through legislative self-interest or a judge's prior knowledge of a case that may influence their ruling, these dilemmas highlight the complexity of ensuring fairness in decision-making processes.