[opentalk]

from a related article

Is it any wonder that the newest Supreme Court justice, Elena Kagan, did not require the study of constitutional law when she was dean of Harvard Law School — but did require the study of foreign law? Those future federal judges graduating Harvard might catch onto the fable liberal activists have gone to such trouble weaving.

What Media Won't Tell You About Separation of Church and State

[November 2010]

Stare Decises. This is the legal principle that judges are to respect the precedents created by prior decisions. It keeps our legal system from being chaotic and unpredictable. However, it is the case that is the precedent. A phrase from the reasoning or a footnote within that reasoning in the opinion is NOT stare decises. Modern judges treat the opinion's language rather than the ruling itself as the precedent. I think they are wrong. Thus in the Everson case where the “separation of church and state” phrase was in the 5-4 decision, the holding, the precedent was that local boards of education COULD use their moneys to transport students to privates schools, including religious ones.