stare decisis

Also found in: Legal, Wikipedia.
Related to stare decisis: precedent

sta·re de·ci·sis

 (stâr′ē dĭ-sī′sĭs)
The doctrine or principle that precedent should determine legal decision making in a case involving similar facts.

[Latin stāre dēcīsīs (et nōn quiēta movēre), to stand by things decided (and not to move things at rest), stāre, to stand, dēcīsīs, ablative neuter pl. of dēcīsus, past participle of dēcīdere, to decide; see decide.]
References in periodicals archive ?
Whatever one may think of state constitutional interpretation generally, or of free expression doctrine in particular, Ciancanelli represents a very strong version of stare decisis.
This case is filled with perilous markers: a blatant political goal; persistent and sustained engagement by the special interests pursuing that goal, backed by repeat-player amici; a perceived invitation by the Court to seek the overruling of a deeply entrenched and repeatedly reaffirmed precedent; the absence of anything resembling a traditional Article III Case or Controversy; the plaintiffs anomalous rush to lose in a previous chapter of this litigation effort; untoward expressions of confidence by those driving the effort that this case will be decided by a 5-4 majority; and the suitors seeking that the Court cast aside of norms of justiciability and stare decisis, Whitehouse and Blumenthal write.
First, this Note argues that stare decisis limits the right of litigants to be heard on the merits of their claims and defenses in a way that undermines the principles of due process.
And we expect the observance of stare decisis, or the doctrine of precedent, when the more important issue of charter change passes through such a gauntlet.
The problem with following stare decisis to the exclusion of all else is, there have been notorious conclusions that were later overturned, such as the Supreme Court's 1857 Dred Scott v.
Even if Roe was wrong, Casey argued, it should be reaffirmed because of stare decisis, the idea that judges should generally adhere to past decisions.
Stare decisis is a sensible rule because, among other things, it protects the reliance interests of those who have structured their affairs in accordance with the Court's existing cases.
The Court generally describes its past decisions as enjoying a presumption of validity through the doctrine of stare decisis.
We generally think of judicial precedent and the doctrine of stare decisis as their own modality of interpretation--not part of a broader reliance on historical practice.
Fundamental rights, however, do not normally yield to that kind of utilitarian calculus, and hiding behind stare decisis looked like weakness, not strength.
Neither party asks us to revisit our controlling precedent, and the doctrine of stare decisis requires us to adhere to our prior decisions (see People v Aarons, 305 AD2d 45, 56 [1st Dept 2003] ["stare decisis stands as a check on a court's temptation to overrule recent precedent.
Further, the Supreme Court itself is heavily bound by its own precedent under a doctrine known as stare decisis, a Latin term meaning "the decision stands.