- When it comes to Supreme Court decisions, the media and election officials frequently talk about long-standing precedents that become accepted jurisprudence. In their eyes, such precedents should almost never be overturned by subsequent courts.
- Justice Antonin Scalia, in a new interview, says he understands and respects Supreme Court precedent but he also says the controversial Roe v. Wade case, that allowed virtually unlimited abortions, is an example of the kind of precedent the high court can and should overturn.
- When asked what happens when linguistic analysis of a law conflicts with existing court decisions, Scalia said that judges cannot reinvent the wheel, particularly if precedent has been in place for a long time.
- “We are textualists. We are originalists. We are not nuts,” he said.
- One prominent exception to that is Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling that legalized abortion. He does not consider that binding precedent, he said, because it was wrong, remains controversial and is an issue better left to legislators than judges.
Scalia: Roe v. Wade an Example of Precedent That Can be Reversed | LifeNews.com
