Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stare Decisis for Me, but Not for Thee
Public Discourse ^ | March 16, 2017 | Robert L. McFarland

Posted on 03/16/2017 8:12:42 AM PDT by fwdude

Whenever a Republican president nominates a judge to the Supreme Court, progressives muse loudly about the importance of stare decisis, the principle governing the law of precedents. All they are worried about is the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In fact, stare decisis does not demand blind adherence to poorly reasoned rulings in the mold of Roe.

(Excerpt) Read more at thepublicdiscourse.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda
A very good, academic treatment on this highly abused (by Democrats) term. Do they, or do they not respect settled law?
1 posted on 03/16/2017 8:12:42 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fwdude

it is pronounced “star-ray dee-SISE-iss”

it means something is already decided in court so you apply that decision

It is so lawyers and judges don’t have to think


2 posted on 03/16/2017 8:16:28 AM PDT by Mr. K (***THERE IS NO CONSEQUENCE OF OBAMACARE REPEAL THAT IS WORSE THAN KEEPING IT ONE MORE DAY***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The Democrat/liberal view is :

1. Settled law must be respected, and not subjected to any changes, if the settled law is in favor of some liberal cause. Abortion and homosexual marriage are two great examples. Those court cases can never be reviewed or overturned, per liberal theology, because they were decided the liberal way.

2. Settled law is not to be respected if it is in conflict with the liberal view of the issue at hand. A good example is the Citizens United case. The liberals consistently want that case overturned, and call for legislation or another court case to overturn this. In this case, liberals are NOT respectful of stare decisis because they didn’t get the outcome they hoped for.


3 posted on 03/16/2017 8:17:19 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The Constitution now says whatever the hell 5 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices want it to say at any time.

One problem with having all laws controlled by an unelected oligarchy of lifetime appointed Supreme Court Justices is that a different 5 Justices can decide that the Constitution says something different at any time.


4 posted on 03/16/2017 8:26:13 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation has ended!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

It’s nearly April...

the Republicans in congress are SCREWING up their LAST CHANCE.

ALL the rules.. should have been THROWN OUT!

Every one of Trumps nominees should have been approved on DAY ONE!

Obamacare repeal should have been on passed on DAY ONE.

If the Republicans don’t GET TO WORK... they will lose BADLY in 2018 and endanger the redistricting in 2020.


5 posted on 03/16/2017 8:30:04 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Make America Great Again !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Good points. I asked a leftist troll on another site if Citizens United, Heller and Hobby Lobby were settled law, the "law of the land" since the USSC ruled on them.

She said, verbatim, "for now." What kind of answer is that?

6 posted on 03/16/2017 8:34:01 AM PDT by fwdude (Democrats have not been this angry since Republicans freed the slaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

I have no doubt that Republicans will willfully throw away their incredible victories over the past 6 years over Obamacare and Supreme Court nominations.

I am truly a man without a Party.


7 posted on 03/16/2017 8:36:29 AM PDT by fwdude (Democrats have not been this angry since Republicans freed the slaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I learned in both journalism and law classes not to bury the lead. This article certainly buries the lead which is that a court ruling is “evidence” of the law and not necessarily the law itself and that the law itself comes from God.


8 posted on 03/16/2017 8:40:44 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

“Stare Decisis”?

Let’s see if we can translate that.

Stare = To gaze at with fierce concentration

De = De

Cisis = Who the heck knows what this means.

So, roughly, “Stare Decisis” means:

“To gaze with fierce concentration at de who the heck knows what.”

You’d have to pay $250,000 to learn this stuff at law school.


9 posted on 03/16/2017 8:48:44 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
I think a policy of stare decisis is wrong for a Supreme Court that is the last level of opportunity to correct a bad decision. If such a policy is cemented in stone, it would fall to Congress and the Executive to assert the "check and balance" responsibility to correct the error.
10 posted on 03/16/2017 9:18:27 AM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Hey McFarland, a nominee for the USSC is a JUSTICE, not a judge.


11 posted on 03/16/2017 9:41:21 AM PDT by SgtHooper (If you remember the 60's, YOU WEREN'T THERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K; fwdude
It is so lawyers and judges don’t have to think

Actually it is a way for judges to amend the Constitution with out an amendment, Congress loves this by the way or they would stop it.

12 posted on 03/16/2017 9:52:44 AM PDT by itsahoot ( The return of the Super Secret, Super Genius Plan of GW fame #136)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
Congress loves this by the way or they would stop it.

Or, it could be that they are just spineless.

13 posted on 03/16/2017 10:03:43 AM PDT by fwdude (Democrats have not been this angry since Republicans freed the slaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson