A dead letter is a law that is no longer used or enforced, even though it has not been formally abolished. For example, a law requiring people to carry a lantern when walking at night is a dead letter, as it is no longer enforced. I know one of our HS teachers told us in Michigan there is a law that has never been repealed. Every time your horseless carriage reaches an intersection, you must stop on the side of the road. Then exit your car and shoot a rifle three times in the air. For safety reasons, so people know someone is in the intersection ahead. Now that last one is interesting. Because it is a dead letter, due to being no longer enforced or recently challenged by the courts. And, it also would be impossible to do now anyways. Because do that act would violate things like laws regarding the reckless discharge of a firearm in Michigan, and of course other places too.
Those are what I regard as driftwood in the legal sense. You have a plethora of laws which have, over time, just accumulated on the books. To me, it’s a way of accumulating, no matter how obscure, ways of prosecuting people. It also clutters law books, making proper jurisprudence both more complicated and more expensive. For this reason, I’ve always been in favor of sunset clauses and a regular review process to remove dead laws from the books. If we’re paying politicians to attend their duties, it makes sense to have some way to make sure the structure they represent is actually reflective of modern life.
I'm not so sceptical. Here in UK, there are many old laws. If there seems to be conflict between one law and an older one, the newer law usually applies. If there's not a direct conflict so the newer law didn't fully replace an older one, there can be new case law written. That's law created by the judge when any existing law (whether or not, in that conflict with an older one ), seems to have a grey area. Much of UK law is formed through 'cases stated' (or case law). It tidies up the original laws, which being based in theory, may not have been properly capable of being applied in practice or to do so would/could have been unjust. Ive no idea what it's like in the US. Imv the legal/justice system is too politicised. In UK, the judiciary is independent of government and ferociously defends that position.
We have some common law - that’s what our court system basically does - but otherwise it’s very much about statutory law. Which can very much bite you in the butt depending on the mood of the arresting officer, prosecutor, etc. Obscure law is still law and can be abused.
