NRA Reply Brief in MacDonald

[Al Norris]

there is an inherent demotivation to overturning the ruling of any previous court.

"Fidelity to precedent—the policy of stare decisis—is vital to the proper exercise of the judicial function. “Stare decisis is the preferred course because it promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, fosters reliance on judicial decisions, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.” For these reasons, we have long recognized that departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a “special justification.”

"At the same time, stare decisis is neither an “inexorable command,” nor “a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision,” especially in constitutional cases. If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants."

—Chief Justice Roberts, concurring in Citizens United (citations omitted).

The above is both the Catch-22 and the caveat of stare decisis.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

"Fidelity to precedent—the policy of stare decisis—is vital to the proper exercise of the judicial function. “Stare decisis is the preferred course because it promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, fosters reliance on judicial decisions, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.” For these reasons, we have long recognized that departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a “special justification.”

"At the same time, stare decisis is neither an “inexorable command,” nor “a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision,” especially in constitutional cases. If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants."

—Chief Justice Roberts, concurring in Citizens United (citations omitted).

I'm glad he said, "At the same time, stare decisis is neither an “inexorable command,” nor “a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision,” especially in constitutional cases," for the Constitution IS an “inexorable command,” and “a mechanical formula of adherence ...". If there is to be a fidelity to precedent, that precedent is the purpose for and intent of the Constitution.

Woody