Question

Stare decisis is a statutory rule requiring judges to follow past court decisions?

1) True
2) False

Answer 1

"Stare decisis is a legal principle that mandates judges to follow past precedents", not a statutory rule. It provides consistency but allows for new precedents when necessary.

Step-by-step explanation:

Stare decisis is not a statutory rule but a legal principle that requires judges to follow precedents set by past court decisions.

This doctrine is a cornerstone of common law systems like those in the United States, mandating courts to look at previously decided cases to guide their decisions on current ones.

However, while judges are expected to adhere to this principle, it does not completely eliminate judicial flexibility or the ability for courts to set new precedents, particularly when changes in societal values or legal interpretations arise.

Answer 2

Stare decisis is a common law doctrine that compels judges to follow established precedents to ensure legal consistency; however, it's not a strict statutory rule as judges retain the ability to overrule precedents when justified by societal evolution or legal interpretation.

Step-by-step explanation:

Stare decisis is not a statutory rule but rather a common law doctrine that requires judges to follow precedents—past court decisions—in order to ensure consistency in law. It allows the legal system to maintain stability and predictability by providing that, as a general rule, courts should adhere to principles established in previous cases when ruling on cases with similar facts.

Judges do, however, have the discretion to overrule precedent if they believe it to be outdated or incorrect, especially when changes in social, moral, or technological landscapes occur. Through this mechanism, the law can evolve over time. High-profile instances, like the contrasting rulings of Plessey v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education, highlight how societal change can precipitate shifts in legal interpretations and precedents.