"I don't think that any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel, Thomas said during the rare public appearance, invoking a term which in a religious context is often used to refer to the word of God. And I do give perspective to the precedent. But the precedent should be respectful of our legal tradition, and our country and our laws, and be based on something not just something somebody dreamt up and others went along with."
"We never go to the front to see who's driving the train, where is it going. And you could go up there in the engine room, find it's an orangutan driving the train, but you want to follow that just because it's a train. At some point we need to think about what we're doing with stare decisis. And it's not some sort of talismanic deal where you can just say stare decisis' and not think, turn off the brain, right?"
Settled legal precedent is not infallible and should be subject to critical evaluation rather than accepted as gospel. Precedent should respect legal tradition, the Constitution, and statutory law, and must rest on substantive legal foundations rather than mere collective acceptance. Stare decisis should not operate as a talisman that shuts down independent judicial reasoning. Blind deference can allow incorrect or poorly grounded decisions to persist. Judicial institutions must examine who is shaping legal trajectories and ensure that adherence to precedent aligns with coherent legal principles. The Court's conservative majority reversed federal abortion rights in June 2022.
Read at www.esquire.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]