Constitutional Precedent in US Supreme Court Reasoning

Más información sobre el libro

Precedent is a vital aspect of judicial decision-making in common law systems like the United States, where the principle of stare decisis ensures similar cases are decided similarly. This adherence to precedent fosters stability, reliability, and uniformity while constraining judicial discretion. However, the U.S. Supreme Court occasionally departs from this principle in constitutional matters. The book explores how the Court, under various Chief Justices, has approached the rejection of its own precedents at different rates. It surveys the history of the Supreme Court up to 2020, focusing on decisions to overturn constitutional precedents and the justifications behind these reversals. The author quantifies which Courts have reversed the most constitutional precedents and examines the reasoning behind these changes. This analysis provides valuable insights into the role of constitutional precedent in Supreme Court reasoning. Essential for law professors and students, the book is also a significant addition to law libraries' collections on legal reasoning and analysis.