A collection of writings on the American Judiciary system.
Stare decisis, latin meaning to "let the decision stand", is the use of previous case law as a rule, deciding factor, or evidence in future cases. Precedence, in a way, creates a third branch of law in addition to statutory law and regulatory law. This writing will specifically argue that hard stare decisis, using precedent as a deciding factor or as immutable fact, is both unconstitutional, unwise, and wrong. Instead, I will argue that precedence should only be used as relevant evidence for what a proper decision might be.
- Why stare decisis should not exist
- The practical problems of precedence
- The havoc of changing precedence
- Sovereign immunity