Editing Precedent (section)

=== ''Stare decisis'' ===
''Stare decisis'' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|t|ɛə|r|i|_|d|ᵻ|ˈ|s|aɪ|s|ᵻ|s|,_|ˈ|s|t|ɑː|r|eɪ}}) is a judicial doctrine under which courts follow the principles, rules, or standards established in their prior decisions (or those of higher courts) when deciding cases involving the same or closely related issues.<ref name=":3" /><ref>{{Cite web |title=Historical Background on Stare Decisis Doctrine {{!}} Constitution Annotated {{!}} Congress.gov {{!}} Library of Congress |url=https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S1-7-2-1/ALDE_00001187/ |access-date=2024-12-01 |website=constitution.congress.gov |language=en |quote="Stare decisis, Latin for to stand by things decided, is a judicial doctrine under which a court follows the principles, rules, or standards of its prior decisions (or decisions of higher tribunals) when deciding a case with arguably similar facts."}}</ref> The term originates from the [[Latin]] phrase ''stare decisis et non quieta movere,'' meaning to "stand by the thing decided and do not disturb the calm."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Historical Background on Stare Decisis Doctrine {{!}} Constitution Annotated {{!}} Congress.gov {{!}} Library of Congress |url=https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S1-7-2-1/ALDE_00001187/#ALDF_00021136 |access-date=2024-12-01 |website=constitution.congress.gov |language=en |quote="The full Latin phrase is stare decisis et non quieta movere—stand by the thing decided and do not disturb the calm. See James C. Rehnquist, Note, The Power That Shall Be Vested in a Precedent: Stare Decisis, The Constitution, and the Supreme Court, 66 B.U. L. Rev. 345, 347 (1986)."}}</ref>

The doctrine operates both horizontally and vertically. Vertical ''stare decisis'' binds lower courts to strictly follow the decisions of higher courts within the same jurisdiction.<ref name="Cornell-definition">{{cite web |title=stare decisis |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/stare_decisis |access-date=1 December 2024 |website=LII / Legal Information Institute |language=en |quote="The doctrine operates both horizontally and vertically. Horizontal stare decisis refers to a court adhering to its own precedent. For example, if the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals adhered to the ruling of a previous Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals case, that would be horizontal stare decisis. A court engages in vertical stare decisis when it applies precedent from a higher court. For example, if the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals adhered to a previous ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, that would be vertical stare decisis. Or, additionally, if the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York adhered to a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, that would be vertical stare decisis."}}</ref> The [[United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit|Seventh Circuit]] Court of Appeals applying a precedent set by the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] is an example of vertical ''stare decisis''.<ref name="Cornell-definition" /> Horizontal ''stare decisis'' refers the principle that a court adheres to its own previous rulings.<ref name="Cornell-definition" />

In the modern era, the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] adheres to its prior decisions unless there is a <q>special justification</q> to overrule precedent.<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |title=Stare Decisis Doctrine Generally {{!}} Constitution Annotated {{!}} Congress.gov {{!}} Library of Congress |url=https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S1-7-2-2/ALDE_00013237/ |access-date=2024-12-01 |website=constitution.congress.gov |language=en |quote="In the modern era, the Supreme Court has applied the doctrine of stare decisis by following the rules of its prior decisions unless there is a special justification—or, at least, strong grounds—to overrule precedent. This justification must amount to more than a disagreement with a prior decision's reasoning. In adopting this approach, the Court has rejected a strict view of stare decisis that would require it to adhere to its prior decisions regardless of those decisions' merits or the practical implications of retaining or discarding precedent."}}</ref> By taking this approach, the Court has rejected a strict view of ''stare decisis'' that would require it to uphold past rulings regardless of their merits or the practical consequences of maintaining or overturning them.<ref name=":7" />