Final answer:
Courts use precedents as a guide for current decisions, upholding the principle of stare decisis, ensuring consistency and stability in the legal system. Precedents are integral to Common Law and can evolve or be overturned when justified.
Step-by-step explanation:
All courts rely heavily upon precedent—how similar cases were handled in the past—as a guide to current decisions. Judges reference previous rulings in order to provide consistency and stability in the legal system through the doctrine known as stare decisis, which means "to stand by things decided" in Latin. While the courts are bound by precedent, this is not an inflexible rule. The legal system retains some flexibility, allowing precedents to evolve or be overturned when necessary, such as in cases when there's a compelling justification or significant changes in law, society, or court composition.
Precedents steer the direction of the judicial system, creating a consistent pattern of decisions that form the basis of Common Law. This principle applies through all courts, from trial courts where cases first begin to the courts of appeals and ultimately the Supreme Court. Occasionally, the Supreme Court will rule differently to adapt to new understandings of rights or to correct past judicial errors, which can move precedents in a direction closer to the preferred outcomes of the justices.