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

To: albie
He set precedent.

You're right, Justice Roberts set precedent, but he did so by ignoring precedent. As is evident from this decision and about every liberal decision of the past 75 years, only conservatives care about precedent. Liberals are busy making a revolution and precedent is their enemy, at least usually. So, precedent is not binding on liberal justices. Conservatives have to start playing by the same rules. There is no stare decisis now, there is only the brute force of a 5-4 vote. Constitution? Without stare decisis, it's a dead letter. We need to accept this terrible fact.

55 posted on 07/01/2012 8:40:44 AM PDT by Gluteus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Gluteus Maximus

“You’re right, Justice Roberts set precedent, but he did so by ignoring precedent. As is evident from this decision and about every liberal decision of the past 75 years, only conservatives care about precedent.”

That needs a little editing. Conservatives care about sensible, rational, and honestly, thoroughly reviewed precedent-setting. Precedence comes in as many forms as actions—good, bad, right, wrong, and everything in between. Roe, like so many bad decisions before and after it, was bad, dishonest, and irrational. And Conservatives are rightly wary of any decision based in whole or in part on previous bad calls.


68 posted on 07/01/2012 10:11:49 AM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

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