There are plenty of people, that insist that everyone should just "obey the law," of which, even if this was an idea worth emulating, this couldn't be done at any level or at any time, for virtue of the fact that this country has so many laws, that meander and contradict one another, that it's impossible for any one individual to even know of all these laws, let alone to correctly comprehend them, over and above the important point, that even lawyers, along with judges, don't clearly know what they law is, themselves. That is to say, if the law was clear cut in every single case, all judges' decisions would not only be unanimous, but also would never be reversed by any court of appeals, which itself, would be redundant. In addition, the lawyers that are arguing on the opposing side of the equation wouldn't have a viable job, for knowing for a fact what that law is, would indicate to them the ultimate futility of arguing against the predictable judgment of that law.
In truth, that isn't how the law, lawyers, justice, and judges actually work in the real world. Additionally, and quite germane to the situation, is that judges have in cases large and small, reversed the decisions of lower courts; and even the Supreme Court, the highest court of this land, has reversed its own decisions, so that, yes, the Supreme Court has ruled one way in a particular day and age, only to rule an entirely different way, in a different day and age, superseding its own previous law. All this would seem to indicate that rather than Lady Justice being impartially blind, with all pertinent information equally weighed; that it would be far more accurate to state that justice is mercurial, specifically, because the judges so ruling have ideologies that cloud and influence their judgment.
This does mean, that for those that solicit the court, that only a very foolish and ignorant lawyer, would not take into their calculations, the ideological makeup of that court, and its respective judges, for clearly there are judges that are diametrically different from one another, so much though, that the outcome of a given case, can in many cases, readily be determined by the judge or judges so deciding that case. This is also the prevailing reason why, so many people get up in arms, about Supreme Court nominees, for because of modern day partisan divisions, judges are deliberately selected, not so much on their jurisprudence, experience, and fairness; but rather as to where they stand in regards to the conservative/liberal spectrum, and quite obviously, judges that are one extreme or the other, can be counted upon to render their decisions by that ideology, and basically throw out the window, whatever applicable precedents, doctrines, and case law, that are pertinent, replaced instead by their personal preference.
When the law is no longer the law, but something that is left to judges to bend and to shade per their inclination, than the decisions so rendered, are done in a manner that dovetails with those so deciding those cases; and when those prevailing winds do change, as they invariably do, then similar cases will be re-decided and will overturn what has come before. The end result is that the application of the law will be inconsistent, prejudicial, unequal, unfair, and flawed.