Source of Supreme Court's authority to overrule prior Supreme Court decisions












1















If the Supreme Court is the final authority, where does the authority of future Supreme Courts come from, to overturn prior results? Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority?










share|improve this question









New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





















  • Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

    – Ron Beyer
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

    – David Schwartz
    2 hours ago













  • Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

    – Joshua
    1 hour ago






  • 1





    The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

    – David Siegel
    1 hour ago


















1















If the Supreme Court is the final authority, where does the authority of future Supreme Courts come from, to overturn prior results? Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority?










share|improve this question









New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





















  • Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

    – Ron Beyer
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

    – David Schwartz
    2 hours ago













  • Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

    – Joshua
    1 hour ago






  • 1





    The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

    – David Siegel
    1 hour ago
















1












1








1








If the Supreme Court is the final authority, where does the authority of future Supreme Courts come from, to overturn prior results? Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority?










share|improve this question









New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












If the Supreme Court is the final authority, where does the authority of future Supreme Courts come from, to overturn prior results? Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority?







jurisdiction us-supreme-court






share|improve this question









New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









Nij

2,06231126




2,06231126






New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 9 hours ago









sheppa28sheppa28

1091




1091




New contributor




sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






sheppa28 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.













  • Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

    – Ron Beyer
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

    – David Schwartz
    2 hours ago













  • Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

    – Joshua
    1 hour ago






  • 1





    The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

    – David Siegel
    1 hour ago





















  • Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

    – Ron Beyer
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

    – David Schwartz
    2 hours ago













  • Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

    – Joshua
    1 hour ago






  • 1





    The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

    – David Siegel
    1 hour ago



















Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

– Ron Beyer
8 hours ago





Related: List of overruled US Supreme Court Decisions

– Ron Beyer
8 hours ago




2




2





No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

– David Schwartz
2 hours ago







No rational system empowers the dead to eternally bind the living. We are very, very fortunate that this has been understood for a very long time.

– David Schwartz
2 hours ago















Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

– Joshua
1 hour ago





Shall Dread Scott stand forever?

– Joshua
1 hour ago




1




1





The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

– David Siegel
1 hour ago







The famous Dread Scott decision was never formally overruled by the US Supreme Court. But the outcome of the US Civil War, plus the three "civil war amendments" (the 13th, 14th, & 15th, esp the 13th) are generally considered to have effectively overruled it. Citing it now in a brief would be highly unwise.

– David Siegel
1 hour ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5















If the Supreme Court is the final authority




The Supreme court is not the final authority. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort, but that does not prevent its case law from possibly being superseded or invalidated by constitutional amendments or the enactment of legislation.




Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority




No. Whether in the form of statutes or court decisions, laws are supposed to preserve ordered liberty. That entails the need to keep up-to-date with the state or evolution of civilization.



If the Supreme Court case law --aka authorities-- were deemed inexorably perpetual, the entire judicial system would become imminently useless due to its inability to respond to new challenges [in the civilization] which are (1) encompassed by prior SC authorities, and yet (2) not properly assessed therein.






share|improve this answer































    5














    The general rule is that a governmental institution cannot bind future versions of itself. Thus a legislature can pass a law, but a later session of that same legislature can amend or repeal it, and the legislature cannot make it unamedable. Similarly, a President can issue an executive order, but later that same President, or a different one, can cancel or modify it.



    A court can, in a proper case, issue a decision. This will tend to form a rule for future cases in the same court, and may form an absolute rule for courts subordinate to the original court, if there are any. But in a later case, the court can issue a decision that conflicts with the earlier decision, thereby partly or fully overruling it. This is not something unique to the US Supreme Court, but is an inherent power of all courts.



    Courts generally prefer not to overrule previous decisions, particularly long-established ones, if they have any other choice. But if the previous decision is later found to be incorrect or unjust, sometimes it will be overruled. Some courts are more willing to do this than others. The US Supreme Court is perhaps more willing than the highest courts of some other countries, but that is a matter of style and judgment, and will vary with the current makeup of the court. Some US Justices have felt more strongly about precedent and stare decisis than others.



    The general reason for the rule is that the later (more recent) actions of a body or office must be considered to overrule earlier actions. Otherwise mistakes could not be corrected, changes of policy could not be implemented, and changing conditions could not be allowed for.



    See also the Wikipedia article on Precedent






    share|improve this answer

























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "617"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });






      sheppa28 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36231%2fsource-of-supreme-courts-authority-to-overrule-prior-supreme-court-decisions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      5















      If the Supreme Court is the final authority




      The Supreme court is not the final authority. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort, but that does not prevent its case law from possibly being superseded or invalidated by constitutional amendments or the enactment of legislation.




      Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority




      No. Whether in the form of statutes or court decisions, laws are supposed to preserve ordered liberty. That entails the need to keep up-to-date with the state or evolution of civilization.



      If the Supreme Court case law --aka authorities-- were deemed inexorably perpetual, the entire judicial system would become imminently useless due to its inability to respond to new challenges [in the civilization] which are (1) encompassed by prior SC authorities, and yet (2) not properly assessed therein.






      share|improve this answer




























        5















        If the Supreme Court is the final authority




        The Supreme court is not the final authority. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort, but that does not prevent its case law from possibly being superseded or invalidated by constitutional amendments or the enactment of legislation.




        Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority




        No. Whether in the form of statutes or court decisions, laws are supposed to preserve ordered liberty. That entails the need to keep up-to-date with the state or evolution of civilization.



        If the Supreme Court case law --aka authorities-- were deemed inexorably perpetual, the entire judicial system would become imminently useless due to its inability to respond to new challenges [in the civilization] which are (1) encompassed by prior SC authorities, and yet (2) not properly assessed therein.






        share|improve this answer


























          5












          5








          5








          If the Supreme Court is the final authority




          The Supreme court is not the final authority. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort, but that does not prevent its case law from possibly being superseded or invalidated by constitutional amendments or the enactment of legislation.




          Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority




          No. Whether in the form of statutes or court decisions, laws are supposed to preserve ordered liberty. That entails the need to keep up-to-date with the state or evolution of civilization.



          If the Supreme Court case law --aka authorities-- were deemed inexorably perpetual, the entire judicial system would become imminently useless due to its inability to respond to new challenges [in the civilization] which are (1) encompassed by prior SC authorities, and yet (2) not properly assessed therein.






          share|improve this answer














          If the Supreme Court is the final authority




          The Supreme court is not the final authority. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort, but that does not prevent its case law from possibly being superseded or invalidated by constitutional amendments or the enactment of legislation.




          Wouldn't past and future courts be of equal authority




          No. Whether in the form of statutes or court decisions, laws are supposed to preserve ordered liberty. That entails the need to keep up-to-date with the state or evolution of civilization.



          If the Supreme Court case law --aka authorities-- were deemed inexorably perpetual, the entire judicial system would become imminently useless due to its inability to respond to new challenges [in the civilization] which are (1) encompassed by prior SC authorities, and yet (2) not properly assessed therein.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 8 hours ago









          Iñaki ViggersIñaki Viggers

          6,5361820




          6,5361820























              5














              The general rule is that a governmental institution cannot bind future versions of itself. Thus a legislature can pass a law, but a later session of that same legislature can amend or repeal it, and the legislature cannot make it unamedable. Similarly, a President can issue an executive order, but later that same President, or a different one, can cancel or modify it.



              A court can, in a proper case, issue a decision. This will tend to form a rule for future cases in the same court, and may form an absolute rule for courts subordinate to the original court, if there are any. But in a later case, the court can issue a decision that conflicts with the earlier decision, thereby partly or fully overruling it. This is not something unique to the US Supreme Court, but is an inherent power of all courts.



              Courts generally prefer not to overrule previous decisions, particularly long-established ones, if they have any other choice. But if the previous decision is later found to be incorrect or unjust, sometimes it will be overruled. Some courts are more willing to do this than others. The US Supreme Court is perhaps more willing than the highest courts of some other countries, but that is a matter of style and judgment, and will vary with the current makeup of the court. Some US Justices have felt more strongly about precedent and stare decisis than others.



              The general reason for the rule is that the later (more recent) actions of a body or office must be considered to overrule earlier actions. Otherwise mistakes could not be corrected, changes of policy could not be implemented, and changing conditions could not be allowed for.



              See also the Wikipedia article on Precedent






              share|improve this answer






























                5














                The general rule is that a governmental institution cannot bind future versions of itself. Thus a legislature can pass a law, but a later session of that same legislature can amend or repeal it, and the legislature cannot make it unamedable. Similarly, a President can issue an executive order, but later that same President, or a different one, can cancel or modify it.



                A court can, in a proper case, issue a decision. This will tend to form a rule for future cases in the same court, and may form an absolute rule for courts subordinate to the original court, if there are any. But in a later case, the court can issue a decision that conflicts with the earlier decision, thereby partly or fully overruling it. This is not something unique to the US Supreme Court, but is an inherent power of all courts.



                Courts generally prefer not to overrule previous decisions, particularly long-established ones, if they have any other choice. But if the previous decision is later found to be incorrect or unjust, sometimes it will be overruled. Some courts are more willing to do this than others. The US Supreme Court is perhaps more willing than the highest courts of some other countries, but that is a matter of style and judgment, and will vary with the current makeup of the court. Some US Justices have felt more strongly about precedent and stare decisis than others.



                The general reason for the rule is that the later (more recent) actions of a body or office must be considered to overrule earlier actions. Otherwise mistakes could not be corrected, changes of policy could not be implemented, and changing conditions could not be allowed for.



                See also the Wikipedia article on Precedent






                share|improve this answer




























                  5












                  5








                  5







                  The general rule is that a governmental institution cannot bind future versions of itself. Thus a legislature can pass a law, but a later session of that same legislature can amend or repeal it, and the legislature cannot make it unamedable. Similarly, a President can issue an executive order, but later that same President, or a different one, can cancel or modify it.



                  A court can, in a proper case, issue a decision. This will tend to form a rule for future cases in the same court, and may form an absolute rule for courts subordinate to the original court, if there are any. But in a later case, the court can issue a decision that conflicts with the earlier decision, thereby partly or fully overruling it. This is not something unique to the US Supreme Court, but is an inherent power of all courts.



                  Courts generally prefer not to overrule previous decisions, particularly long-established ones, if they have any other choice. But if the previous decision is later found to be incorrect or unjust, sometimes it will be overruled. Some courts are more willing to do this than others. The US Supreme Court is perhaps more willing than the highest courts of some other countries, but that is a matter of style and judgment, and will vary with the current makeup of the court. Some US Justices have felt more strongly about precedent and stare decisis than others.



                  The general reason for the rule is that the later (more recent) actions of a body or office must be considered to overrule earlier actions. Otherwise mistakes could not be corrected, changes of policy could not be implemented, and changing conditions could not be allowed for.



                  See also the Wikipedia article on Precedent






                  share|improve this answer















                  The general rule is that a governmental institution cannot bind future versions of itself. Thus a legislature can pass a law, but a later session of that same legislature can amend or repeal it, and the legislature cannot make it unamedable. Similarly, a President can issue an executive order, but later that same President, or a different one, can cancel or modify it.



                  A court can, in a proper case, issue a decision. This will tend to form a rule for future cases in the same court, and may form an absolute rule for courts subordinate to the original court, if there are any. But in a later case, the court can issue a decision that conflicts with the earlier decision, thereby partly or fully overruling it. This is not something unique to the US Supreme Court, but is an inherent power of all courts.



                  Courts generally prefer not to overrule previous decisions, particularly long-established ones, if they have any other choice. But if the previous decision is later found to be incorrect or unjust, sometimes it will be overruled. Some courts are more willing to do this than others. The US Supreme Court is perhaps more willing than the highest courts of some other countries, but that is a matter of style and judgment, and will vary with the current makeup of the court. Some US Justices have felt more strongly about precedent and stare decisis than others.



                  The general reason for the rule is that the later (more recent) actions of a body or office must be considered to overrule earlier actions. Otherwise mistakes could not be corrected, changes of policy could not be implemented, and changing conditions could not be allowed for.



                  See also the Wikipedia article on Precedent







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 3 hours ago

























                  answered 3 hours ago









                  David SiegelDavid Siegel

                  7,4921035




                  7,4921035






















                      sheppa28 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      sheppa28 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                      sheppa28 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      sheppa28 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36231%2fsource-of-supreme-courts-authority-to-overrule-prior-supreme-court-decisions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to make a Squid Proxy server?

                      Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

                      19世紀