If judges are supposed to make decisions on an issue based solely on the facts and applicable law, what is the role of ethical norms in influencing a judge's decision?

What will be an ideal response?

A judge's claiming or implying allegiance to a particular ethical norm focuses our attention on a specific category of desired conduct. Courts do not often announce their preferred pattern of ethical norms. Therefore, it is up to us to infer their identity from the court's reasoning. As critical thinkers, we want to use the ethical norms, once we find them, as a basis for evaluating the reasoning. Since any given fact pattern may be susceptible to more than one interpretation of more than one rule of law, the judge's emphasis of one ethical norm over another often explains why the judge chose to emphasize one particular interpretation over all others. For example, if a particular court issues decisions that consistently emphasize efficiency over personal freedom, a lawyer can better predict the direction of a future interpretation of a similar law involving a different set of facts.