Author Archives: F. E. Guerra-Pujol

Via The Economist (circa 2015):

That is the subject of this three-page paper by Jan P. de Ruiter. All our colleagues and friends (including grad students) should take the time to read it!

For the convenience of any of our followers who are as fascinated by the legal doctrine of stare decisis as we are, below are links to our six-part extended review of Randy Kozel’s excellent new book “Settled Versus Right“: Introduction … Continue reading →

Rather than end our extended review of Randy Kozel’s excellent new book on precedent (“Settled Versus Right”) on a negative note, we shall conclude our review by stating our points of agreement with Kozel and then offering an alternative solution … Continue reading →

FYI: We will conclude our review of Randy Kozel’s book “Settled Versus Right” on 15 May. (In other words, we’re taking Monday off.)

In our previous post, we saw why the doctrine of stare decisis is such a feeble constraint in constitutional cases, since (as Kozel correctly claims) there is no universal metric for weighing the positive or negative effects of a precedent. … Continue reading →

Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of “Settled Versus Right” mount a powerful critique of precedent, or to be more precise, these chapters show why precedent is such a feeble constraint in practice, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s oft-repeated lip service … Continue reading →

Chapter 2 of “Settled Versus Right” weighs the pros and cons of stare decisis. Let’s jump in with the cons. Kozel sums up the main argument against stare decisis as follows (p. 50): “The job of judges is to interpret … Continue reading →