Use and Limits of

Deductive Reasoning
Easy Cases v. Hard Cases
Easy cases - are those that are governed by unambiguous
legal rules of unchallenged validity; in such cases, the legal
conclusion follows deductively from the applicable rule of
law.
Hard Cases - are cases where the same are difficult because
the applicable rule of law is ambiguous, or because the
validity of the rule has been challenged.
Two types of Hard Cases: (1) cases where the applicable
rule of law is ambiguous, and (2) cases where it is uncertain
what the correct rule of law is.
• Deductive logic is powerless to resolve hard cases.

• Hard cases are resolved by balancing. This balancing

proceeds on two levels: (1) we evaluate the strength of
a legal argument standing alone, and (2) we evaluate
its strength as compared to other types of arguments.
Five Types of Legal Argument:

(1)Text;
(2)Intent;
(3)Precedent;
(4)Tradition; and
(5)Policy analysis
Metaphor for Legal Arguments:

1. A “chain” of syllogisms – Judge Aldisert

2.A “cable” – William Eskridge and Philip Frickey
The five types of Ambiguity:
(1) lexical ambiguity;
(2) relational ambiguity;
(3) ambiguity of implication;
(4) ambiguity from competing versions of a rule; and
(5) ambiguity from a conflict between rules.