Introduction
Can you name a single Supreme Court justice? If the answer is yes, good for you! And if not, don't worry: More than half of people likely to struggle with this question. However, regardless of your familiarity with the justices, it is crucial to understand the doctrine of stare decisis and its impact on Supreme Court decisions.
The Doctrine of Stare Decisis
An expected Supreme Court rollback of abortion rights has put renewed focus on when and how the justices decide to reverse precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis. Stare decisis is a legal principle that derives from Latin, meaning "to stand by things decided." It refers to the practice of following established legal precedents when making subsequent decisions.
Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), recognized a federal constitutional right to abortion. These landmark cases have been highly influential in shaping abortion laws in the United States. However, as the Supreme Court wrestles with the Mississippi abortion law, the Latin phrase "stare decisis" is likely to keep coming up.
The Role of Stare Decisis in Supreme Court Rulings
The doctrine of stare decisis plays a significant role in Supreme Court rulings. It ensures stability, consistency, and predictability in the law by promoting respect for precedent. When the Court adheres to stare decisis, it is less likely to overturn prior decisions unless there are compelling reasons to do so.
The George Mason Law Review Symposium
At the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC, on Friday, October 20, 2023, the George Mason Law Review will be hosting a terrific symposium discussing the doctrine of stare decisis. Legal scholars, practitioners, and judges will gather to examine the significance and application of stare decisis in the modern legal landscape.
The Weight of Overruling Precedent
It is no small thing for the U.S. Supreme Court to abandon its own precedent. Even Justice Samuel Alito admitted as much in his remarks, acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining the Court's credibility and integrity. Overruling precedent can have profound implications for legal principles and public trust in the judiciary.
The Controversy Surrounding Potential Reversal of Roe v. Wade
The leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion this week that would overturn the landmark 1973 decision Roe v. Wade has raised fresh questions about the Court's stance on stare decisis. This potential reversal has sparked intense debates and fueled concerns about the future of abortion rights in the United States.
Noteworthy Cases Overruled by the Court
The 2017–18 Supreme Court term was noteworthy for many reasons. One is the fact that the Court overruled two longstanding (at least 40 years) precedents: Abood v. Detroit Board of Education and Quill Corp. v. North Dakota. These decisions highlight the Court's power to depart from previously established legal principles.
Contrasting Approaches: Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes
On the bench, Clarence Thomas takes precisely the opposite approach from that of Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, who famously quipped, "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is." Thomas, known for his originalist approach, believes in limited deference to precedent, favoring a more flexible interpretation of the Constitution.
