Secondly, the HRID's reasonableness analysis allows the Court to avoid ad hoc judgments of the Contract Clause's applicability.
The HRID represents a return to a focus on reasonable expectations in Contract Clause challenges.
Although much of the HRID's view of reliance is unspoken, the concept of reasonableness of expectations enjoys extensive discussion in legal scholarship.
The HRID calculus, however, hinges on an expectation's legitimacy, not its rationality.
In this regard, the HRID's standard of reasonableness is a standard of legitimacy.
Legitimacy-focused reasonableness determinations, like the HRID, permit broad classifications of reasonableness rather than case-by-case judgments.
Although the HRID presupposes the need to account for subsequent state legislation in an actor's reasonableness calculus, the Court has not explained why this requirement is important.
This factor is crucial to an understanding of why legal changes arise as well as why the HRID tolerates such changes.
The HRID relies, in part, on the fact of legislative discontinuity.
In addition to the timing considerations section II.C.1 addresses, the HRID finds its theoretical bases in the legislature's necessary powers as well as in analogous constitutional doctrine.
The doctrine also draws upon inherent powers doctrine in that the HRID seeks to prevent entrenchment of prior legislative wishes due to party reliance.