Justice Kavanaugh would set a bad precedent on precedents

Published April 23, 2020 8:21pm ET



Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh wasn’t quite successful when he tried this week to answer the thorny question of when court precedent should be binding and when instead it should be overturned.

Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion on Monday in a criminal-justice case called Ramos v. Louisiana amounted to a disquisition on the legal doctrine of “stare decisis.” The doctrine, whose name means “let the decision stand,” holds that, in general, courts should respect precedent and avoid frequently or arbitrarily changing the way they rule on the same issue.

Already a print subscriber? Click here to login/register your account

Trusted reporting.Unlimited access.

Subscribe for full access to Washington Examiner coverage, expert political analysis, and subscriber-only journalism.

Get Unlimited Access

Already a member? Log in

Cancel anytime.