Does the SJC in Massachussetts regularly give guidelines to the legislature when it strikes down laws?

Question

Like what they did with the landmark gay marriage ruling. I'm having a dispute with a friend and I want to provide evidence that guidelines are often given by courts around the country to legislatures after a ruling.

Answer 1

Whenever a law is declared unconstitutional, the court's holding includes the reasoning, the specific conflict, and precedent supporting their decision.

Occasionally, a court may include suggestions on how to correct the law. But more often, the court just explains what is wrong with the old law, and allows the legislature to come up with its own new versions. That better preserves the role of the courts.

Besides, it's not that difficult to figure out what needs to change once you're told exactly what's wrong with the old version. It's like when a teacher points out a spelling mistake on your paper. The teacher doesn't need to provide the correct spelling, because there are plenty of other resources to do it.

In the rare case where a piece of legislation deals with an entirely new area of law, and there are no existing laws to use to find out what is known to work, the court will generally set down the constitutional requirements (thresholds, etc.) to explain what would be allowed and what would not.

But ultimately, it's the job of the legislature to come up with the specific wording of a new law, and the job of the court to analyze that law and see if it causes constitutional problems.