Justice Thomas says SCOTUS should not follow ‘demonstrably erroneous precedent’

Justice Thomas says SCOTUS should not follow ‘demonstrably erroneous precedent’

The long reign of unquestioned “stare decisis,” or blind deference to legal precedent, is over.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas challenged the long-standing doctrine in a 17-page concurring opinion on Monday, arguing that the subjective manner in which the courts evaluate precedent has become corrupted by partisanship. Thomas’ break with enduring legal tradition has prompted some legal scholars to conclude that he is “laying the groundwork for a Roe v. Wade reversal” — seeking to overturn the 1973 landmark case that legalized abortion.

Revolutionary ruling

“When faced with a demonstrably erroneous precedent, my rule is simple: We should not follow it,” Thomas wrote. “This view of stare decisis follows directly from the Constitution’s supremacy over other sources of law—including our own precedents. That the Constitution outranks other sources of law is inherent in its nature.”

Thomas criticized the “multi-factor approach” to overturning precedent in a court case that, on its surface, had little to do with this legal doctrine. Gamble v. U.S. was a case dealing with the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment which states that “nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”

In a 7-2 majority, the Supreme Court declined to overturn the “longstanding dual-sovereignty doctrine” which allows individuals to be prosecuted by both state and federal governments. According to Thomas, who initially harbored “skepticism” with the government’s position, “where there are two sovereigns, there are two laws and two ‘ offenses,’” leaving citizens subject to punishment from multiple jurisdictions.

Legislating from the bench

After clearing that up, Thomas turned his attention towards the “proper role of the doctrine of stare decisis.” He insisted that the high court should “restore our stare decisis jurisprudence to ensure that we exercise ‘mer[e] judgment,’ which can be achieved through adherence to the correct, original meaning of the laws we are charged with applying.”

“In my view, anything less invites arbitrariness into judging,” Thomas observed.

The Supreme Court currently balances several factors when judging whether to overturn a precedent. “Among these factors are the ‘workability’ of the standard, ‘the antiquity of the precedent, the reliance interests at stake, and of course whether the decision was well reasoned,’” Thomas wrote.

This latter standard, allowing jurists to evaluate if a decision is “well reasoned,” opens the door to partisanship and “provides a ready means of justifying whatever result five Members of the Court seek to achieve,” Thomas wrote. “The Court’s multifactor balancing test for invoking stare decisis has resulted in policy-driven, ‘arbitrary discretion,’” he added.

Thomas’s nonconformist opinion is bad news for Roe v. Wade. He even cited Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, which serves as a modern affirmation of Roe v. Wade’s principles, as an example of justices using the precedent evaluation process to force a political outcome. “[T]he shared theme,” Thomas reasoned, “is the need for a ‘special reason over and above the belief that a prior case was wrongly decided’ to overrule a bad precedent.”

“Simple rule”

Thomas’s “simple rule” is that when a precedent is “demonstrably erroneous,” it should be overturned. Judges should look to the guiding principles of the Constitution when making these decisions, not the fallible and arbitrary precedent handed down by other judges.

“The Constitution tasks the political branches—not the Judiciary—with systematically developing the laws that govern our society,” he wrote. “The Court’s role, by contrast, is to exercise the ‘judicial Power,’ faithfully interpreting the Constitution and the laws enacted by those branches.”

While he may or may not prevail in changing the way that judges treat precedent, the longest-serving justice on the Supreme Court is establishing that it’s a concept open to debate, in contrast to its unquestioned standing for the last few decades. This could revolutionize the way that judges look at case law and challenge long-established statutes that were once considered legally immutable.

Source:

Share your thoughts with the world by posting a message on the Liberty Tree.

Tell Us What Liberty Means To You 

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato (429-347 BC)

TRY THE LIBERTY TREE AD FREE

THE LIBERTY TREE FRIENDS & PATRIOTS

 "FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM AND LIBERTY"

and is protected speech pursuant to the "unalienable rights" of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, In God we trust

Stand Up To Government Corruption and Hypocrisy

Knowledge Is Power And Information is Liberating: The FRIENDS OF LIBERTY BLOG GROUPS are non-profit blogs dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

                                                                                                    

NEVER FORGET THE SACRIFICES

BY OUR VETERANS 

Note: We at The Liberty Tree cannot make any warranties about the completeness, reliability, and accuracy of this information.

Don't forget to follow the Friends Of Liberty on Facebook and our Page also Pinterest, Twitter, Tumblr, Me We and  PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

LibertygroupFreedom    

The Patriot is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with the mission to Educate, protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights.

Support the Trump Presidency and help us fight Liberal Media Bias. Please LIKE and SHARE this story on Facebook or Twitter.

WE THE PEOPLE

TOGETHER WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! 

Join The Resistance and Share This Article Now!

TOGETHER WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
Help us spread the word about THE LIBERTY TREE Blog we're reaching millions help us reach millions more.

‼️️ ♻️ PLEASE SHARE ♻️ ‼️️

Please SHARE this now! The Crooked Liberal Media will hide and distort the TRUTH. It’s up to us, Trump social media warriors, to get the truth out. If we don’t, no one will!

Share this story on Facebook and let us know because we want to hear YOUR voice!

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' news feeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share with your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you

❦❧❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦❧❦

For you see, the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.

  Coningsby: Or The New Generation And, The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings, and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments’ plans. — Benjamin Disraeli, Speech at Aylesbury, Great Britain, September 10, 1870

◈ ◈ ◈ ◈ ◈ ◈ ◈ ◈