The five opinions written by the "judges" in "The Case of the Speluncean Explorers", a hypothetical case originally published the Harvard Law Review, represent a range of ideas expressed by each judge about problems concerning law and justice as well as how courts should interpret statutes and apply them in difficult cases.

After reading each of the opinions, post your view on the discussion board as to which judge you think approached the case in the most appropriate way. Explain why you think the opinion you chose is the best one and defend your choice. You should also explain why the one you chose was superior to the views of the other judges and specifically which judge you think had the weakest position. What specific facts and circumstances about the explorers' dilemma do you see as especially salient? Finally, what do we learn from the Speluncean Explorers case about the problems judges face in determining whether it's their responsibility to provide justice in difficult cases or whether their task is only to strictly apply the law to the issue before them?