Bright-line rule
 |
Look up bright-line rule in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
A bright-line rule (or bright-line test) is a clearly defined rule or standard, generally used in law, composed of objective factors, which leaves little or no room for varying interpretation. The purpose of a bright-line rule is to produce predictable and consistent results in its application. This is in contrast to its opposite, the fine line.
Bright-line rules are usually standards established by courts in legal precedent or by legislatures in statutory provisions. Bright-line rules are often contrasted with balancing tests, where a result is dependent on weighing several factors, which could lead to inconsistent application of law or reduce objectivity.
Contents |
[edit] Debate in the US
In the United States, there is much scholarly legal debate between those favoring bright-line rules and those favoring balancing tests. While some legal scholars, such as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, have expressed a strong preference for bright-line rules, critics often argue that bright-line rules are over-simplistic and can lead to harsh and unjust results. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer noted that there are circumstances in which the application of bright-line rules would be inappropriate, stating that "no single set of legal rules can ever capture the ever changing complexity of human life."[1] Over the course of the last three decades, many bright-line rules previously established in U.S. jurisprudence have been replaced with balancing tests.[citation needed]
[edit] Example of a bright-line rule
- American statutory rape laws, including Romeo and Juliet laws – In most states, the age of the victim and the age of the accused are the only relevant factors determinative of guilt or innocence.[2] Because it is a bright-line rule, there is no balancing test to examine factors such as mistake of the accused, the misrepresentation of age by the minor, or the minor's consent to sexual intercourse.
- In Michigan v. Summers, the Supreme Court announced the bright-line rule that law enforcement officers have the authority to detain the occupants of a residence while conducting a search for contraband. The rule was intended to provide clear rules to law enforcement personnel and avoid case-by-case analysis. Scholars have challenged the clarity and efficacy of this bright-line rule in practice.[3]
[edit] Notable cases containing bright-line rules
- Miranda v. Arizona
- Goldberg v. Kelly
- Michigan v. Summers
- Storer Doctrine
- SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194 (1947)
- National Petroleum Refiners Assn. v. FTC, 482 F.2d 672 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 951 (1974)
- Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458 (1983)
- Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital, 488 U.S. 204 (1988)
- Sameena, Inc. v. U.S. Air Force, 147 F.3d 1148 9th Cir. (1998)
- Evans v. the United Kingdom
[edit] References
- ^ Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 125, 126 S. Ct. 1515, 1529, 164 L. Ed. 2d 208, 229 (2006) (Breyer, J., concurring).
- ^ Statutory Rape Laws by State
- ^ Amir H. Ali, Following the Bright-Line of Michigan v. Summers, 45 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 483 (2010)
[edit] External links
- Language Log Discussion of the phrase, with examples and history
 |
This legal term article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
