3 ms·
The US has a common law system, which means supreme court precedent is binding. Once a case is decided courts aren't supposed to decide the same case in the oth
by colinmhayes 4y ago
The US has a common law system, which means supreme court precedent is binding. Once a case is decided courts aren't supposed to decide the same case in the other direction. The supreme court has decided many cases showing that Americans have the right to abortion until viability. Undoing that precedent is a largely unprecedented move.
The New York carry case seems like it was probably decided correctly, what's interesting to me is that the courts gun law doctrine relies on deciding whether the law is "consistent with the nations historical tradition of firearm control." The court decided this law was not, even though it is over a century old and 7 states have had similar laws for decades. At what point does it become part of our historical tradition?
- cryptonector 4y agoBrown vs. Board of Education undid a ~60 year precedent. This case undoes a 50 year precedent. The court has to be allowed to undo precedents once in a while. Otherwise we'd have to fight a civil war over every Dred Scott case. I'm NOT saying this case, or yesterday's, was rightly decided. I'm only pointing out that the court has changed its mind a number of times in the past, and will again in the future.