Question

What are the pros and cons of disregarding precedents?

Answer 1

What is precedent?

In the world of politics and law, precedent refers to a legal principle established in a prior court ruling that should be adhered to in subsequent rulings in accordance with stare decisis (Latin for "to stand by things decided"), a legal doctrine for adhering to precedent.

Pro

• Disregarding precedent is one way the U.S. justice system adapts and remains current with an ever-changing society and culture.

Times change, but precedent does not. For instance, a ruling made in 1896 may have set a precedent perceived as outdated several decades later. Such was the case with the landmark Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), affirming and precedenting racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine; however, the precedent Plessy v. Ferguson set would later be overturned in another landmark case, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), under the review of a more modern Supreme Court, influenced by a changing society.

Con

• Disregarding precedent creates room for unpredictability within the justice system and undermines the authority vested in precedent.

When it comes to the law, predictability is important in the maintenance of an orderly society so that members of society can function with an awareness of what they can and cannot do to avoid unsavory consequences. When precedent is disregarded, the law is changed, and the justice system becomes less predictable. Additionally, when precedent is overturned, stare decisis is violated, and the authority of the precedent itself, along with those who set it, is undermined.