You mean precedents like "Dred Scott" and "Plessy vs. Ferguson." I wouldn't rule in favor of slavery and segregation, but they were once your sacred "precedents."
There are liberal judges ruling against the Pledge of Allegiance and for Gitmo terror suspects, so lets get some conservative judges who will stir up dust and in the style of Gen. George S. Patton: "Grab those precedents by the nose and kick em' in the a**."
And that includes the 1987 decision of the Supreme Court that was Jones' "precedent"
in this case.
So what, exactly, is bad about this particular ruling?