In a dispute between Cloud Computing Corporation and Digital Enterprises, Inc., the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis. What is this doctrine? What does this doctrine have to do with the American legal system? Can this doctrine ever be overruled or overturned? If so, how? Lastly, do you believe most businesses in the United States agree with stare decisis or disagree with the concept? Why?
Your paper should be 500-750 words and should have at least two external resources, cited appropriate
Stare decisis is a legal doctrine that permits the court to use historical cases when dealing with similar cases. The court makes sure the cases are similar in terms of facts and the case is a doctrine of precedent approaches used in making decisions. In other words, stare decisis is a doctrine for precedent cases, which are unique cases, without past reference materials (Varsava, 2018). The stare decisis doctrine is vital in allowing previous ruling made by the high court is used within the same court system.The paper is a discussion of stare decisis.
The American court system is allowed to follow a previous ruling from the Supreme Court. The united states supreme court stare decisis supports consistent development of legal principles, promotes judicial decision making, promoted perceived integrity, and fosters reliance and predictability of legal principles. The Supreme Court’s predictability is beneficial to the public in clarifying the United States’ constitutional rights and obligations. Also, the Supreme Court does not apply to previous decisions concerning a case, mostly when the decision was made in doubt. According to legal experts, stare decisis is not applicable in cases involving personal opinion, for instance, secret body laws created by intelligence and surveillance agencies.
Additionally, stare decisis depends on consistently used and reliable publications about court opinion and decisions. The court does not make decisions based on outside sources, such as public opinion and arbitration. Court publications need to be available to make legal decisions. Opinions made from the foreign intelligence surveillance courts should be published. On the other hand, the relationship between stare decisis and secret law is that stare decisis permits judges the authority to make laws within any jurisdiction. The American stare decisis doctrine is discussed in parts one, two, and three of the commentary will (Burgess, 2020). In the American court system, all cases have the potential ability to be precedents where, regardless of decisions from prior cases, the court has to consider binding and persuasive authority.
According to the American system, a case is considered a binding precedent. When the previous cases are compared and contracted with the briefs and pieces of evidence provided in court, the cases should have a higher degree of factual similarities. The case should also be compared with the past cases, ensuring the cases consist of the same legal question. Lastly, the judge should research the case before reviewing the arguments. On the other side, the case should decide in the same court and follow the same hierarchical order, for example, the district court, court of appeal, and the United States Supreme Court. The stare of decisis doctrine is essential to the American court system to promote stability, respect people under the law, promote legal change in a gradual process, and promote efficiency as the late function.
Part three provides a discussion of the judicial evolution in overturning the precedents (Burgess, 2020). The use of stare decisis in making critical decisions concerning complex issues raises concerns about whether the doctrine can allow correction of decisions. Correction of decisions is based on abandoned legal doctrines, faulty reasoning, and outdated factual reasoning. The Supreme Court has allowed overruling based on workability, quality of reasoning, inconsistency with previous and related decisions, and changes of relevant facts. Stare decisis can be overturned, such as in Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce and South Dakota v. Wayfair, concerning trade (Burgess, 2020). The doctrine can be overturned when supported by various laws, such as trade laws, for instance, commerce laws that do not restrict a trader from collecting tax concerning sales made to residents of the state.
I think most businesses in the United States disagree with stare decisis because most overturned cases are business cases. Stare decisis doctrine does not assist businesses in correcting mistakes, which raises the question about the courts’ value. Also, the lack of a guide for businesses is a form of pluralism in courts. The court disagrees with the decisions made previously concerning trade, especially on cases dealing with tax. Most of the business laws under stare decisis are unsettles, and the doctrine provides no room for interpretation. Stare decisis have narrow impacts on businesses in the United States.
Burgess, C. (2020). Principle or Partisanship: An Analysis of the Role Stare Decisis Plays in Supreme Court Jurisprudence.
Varsava, N. (2018). How to Realize the Value of Stare Decisis: Options for Following Precedent. Yale JL & Human., 30, 62.