- Why is this a good thing, or a bad thing?
This is a good thing that maintains that previous decisions are to be followed by the courts. It is helps ensure stability and predictability in law. Stare decisis is a doctrine or policy of following rules or principles laid down in previous judicial decisions. By giving significant weight to previous decisions, a consistent set of case law is developed from which the public can draw conclusions about how a court will decide a current or future case.
- Would not a better way simply be for the judge to apply whatever law is applicable based on the facts of the current case?
If the judge based on the facts of the current case, it has a lot of uncertainty for different personality. The court need continuously reevaluate the legal underpinnings and accepted doctrines. This would be a huge workload, also difficult to maintain legal fair judgment. It will lost the predictability afforded by the doctrine helps clarify constitutional …show more content…
It apply to the American Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. It is important because in our system of law, the courts look at previous decisions which can greatly influence the outcome of a case. If there was no stare decisis, then every judge would be able to decide a case based on his own logic, and there would be no certainty in our legal system. It provides a degree of certainty when you go to court insofar as you can rely on like cases being treated alike.

- Were the framers of the American Constitution considering this?
The American Constitution delineates the national frame of government. The stare decisis is the development of the judicial power. Stare decisis does not conflict with the Supremacy Clause because the Constitution does not preclude judges from deferring to the reasonable constitutional interpretations of other governmental actors, which is what stare decisis amounts