How to Realize the Value of Stare Decisis: Options for following Precedent

Nina Varsava

Journal: Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities

Volume: 30

Year: 2019

Bluebook Citation: 30 YALE J. L. & HUMAN. (2019)

Author: Nina Varsava: all 6 publications


Abstract

When courts deliberate on the implications of a precedent case in the adjudication of a new dispute, they generally frame the issue as if there are three paths through---{1) follow the precedent, (2) overrule, or (3) distinguish-without acknowledging that option number one contains its own garden of forking paths. My chief aim in this paper is to delineate and evaluate several options for following precedent. I show that we can respect the doctrine of precedent or stare decisis without committing to any one particular method. I argue further that we have good reason to refrain from endorsing any single method for following precedent, and I propose instead a variable approach-one that is sensitive to the contextual factors that make one method preferable to another.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.