Final Word on U.S. Law Isn’t: Supreme Court Keeps Editing

New York Times ^ | May 24 | Adam Liptak

[PghBaldy]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has been quietly revising its decisions years after they were issued, altering the law of the land without public notice. The revisions include “truly substantive changes in factual statements and legal reasoning,” said Richard J. Lazarus, a law professor at Harvard and the author of a new study examining the phenomenon.

[PghBaldy]

I searched, could not find this posted. I note, that Scalia's mistake is mentioned repeatedly in the article. More serious errors by others (liberal women) are casually mentioned in passing.

[PghBaldy]

Of course, I now found it, posted from HotGas:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3160364/posts

[dangus]

Seems like the facts in the article never live up to the sensationalistic first line. Although they come up with two significant cases where judges (Scalia and O’Connor) retract misstatements on other justice’s positions, it’s not at all as if judges are changing their legal reasoning on a case.

At first it, the article seems like it is about to describe where final verdicts may remain the same, but there are significant changes to the vision of the law which led to them. THis is not at all what happens.