Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why does this bandying about of "stare decisis" feel like a red herring?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 10:58 AM
Original message
Why does this bandying about of "stare decisis" feel like a red herring?
I'm probably not alone in never having heard the term before Alito appeared on the radar screen and, now, it's the soundbite of the week. I have the sneaking suspicion that it's a big fat deception.

Shhh. Go to sleep, now. Stare decisis. All is well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. Red herring or Dead Fish?
It's a joke. Say it a lot, and make people think you give a shit, and will follow precedent. Alito cleary could give two shits about Stare Decisis, unless it pertains to a ruling which benefits the corporatocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. Throw in some Latin for instant cred
Tempus fugit, baby. E Pluribus Unum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
3. Well, it's a legal term.
Under the philosophy that prior holdings are binding law on the court itself, "stare decisis" is a holding that is to be applied to all following cases with the same facts. Except it isn't, because holdings that are stare decisis can be overruled, too. But there are a bunch of cases describing when stare decisis can be overruled.

Of course, all a court has to do is a) explicitly overrule its cases on when they overrule prior cases or b) just start overruling without ever explicitly admitting it is doing so. The latter happens a lot.

For the SC, the only restraint is the judgment of the court itself.....so you have to appoint people with good judgment and w/hold confirmation of those without.

Comforted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. If you haven't heard it before, you didn't pay any attention to
the Roberts hearings. It was thrown around constantly during those hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I thought so but I couldn't remember for sure if it was usd then, too.
In both cases, it's an attempt to lull us into thinking their rulings will never oppose SCOTUS precedents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
5. There was a NEW one this AM! Two kinds of Stare decisis!!!
Alito said this this AM.

"There are two kind of stari decisis; Vertical stare decisis, and horizontal stare decisis."

I didn't even hear his explaination of the difference between the two! Sorry, I was busy yelling at my TV!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Translation: There is a form of "stare decisis" which allows me to...
...overturn Roe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC