Why do justices use precedents in majority opinions and dissents?

a. to show that other cases with similar circumstances came to a similar decision
b. to review the main points that were originally presented in the case
c. to familiarize themselves with cases that had opposite outcomes
d. to emphasize the importance of the judicial process in making a

The correct answer is A.

A precedent is a legal case that establishes what is called "principle or rule." This principle is used by the court when deciding later cases with similar issues or facts. This is because the Courts in the U.S. legal system wish to have consistent rulings in similar cases.

no,

explanation:

because they are likely to use their corrupted thought process to get what they want. not what is better for the another reason they shouldn't is since they abused their rights as a us citizen they should have certain rights stripped away from them as punishment, such as the right to vote. due to the lack of proper behavior exemplified   from their actions , it would be hard for people to trust them because of their criminal record.   either directly (in the case of a referendum or ballot initiative) or indirectly (by choosing lawmakers and law enforcers). in fact, we do have certain minimum, objective standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that we require people to meet before they are given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. people who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards. and those crimes can include such “non-violent felonies” as, say, treason and espionage, or voter fraud and public corruption, white-collar crime and felonies merely “concerning drugs” — like trafficking in fentanyl-laced heroin and selling it to minors, for example. if you’re not willing to follow the law, then you should not have a role in making the law for everyone else.

the answer is c the speaker emotions