Second Opinions

34 Pages Posted: 21 Jul 2010 Last revised: 17 Aug 2010

Date Written: July 21, 2010

Abstract

There is a burgeoning literature on second opinions in professional contexts, as when patients or clients seek advice from a second doctor or lawyer. My aim, by contrast, is to analyze second opinions as a central feature of public law. I will try to show that many institutional structures, rules and practices have been justified as mechanisms for requiring or permitting decisionmakers to obtain second opinions; examples include judicial review of statutes or of agency action, bicameralism, the separation of powers, and the law of legislative procedure. I attempt to identify the main costs and benefits of second opinions, to identify conditions under which second-opinion arguments prove more or less successful, and to consider how the lawmaking system might employ second-opinion mechanisms to greater effect. I claim, among other things, that the Supreme Court should adopt a norm that two successive decisions, not merely one, are necessary to create binding law.

Suggested Citation

Vermeule, Adrian, Second Opinions (July 21, 2010). Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-38, Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper No. 673, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1646414 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1646414

Adrian Vermeule (Contact Author)

Harvard Law School ( email )

1525 Massachusetts
Griswold 500
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
258
Abstract Views
2,467
Rank
215,627
PlumX Metrics