[eDebate] Cases v. Areas

[Geoffrey Derrick]

Caity wrote "can list supporters suggest wordings that would resolve the 
ambiguity of what "overruling a decision" means? absent a different 
type of topic (overrule a test or statute instead of a case), this 
problem seems like an important one to deal with. my problem isn't 
necessarily just "cases can be overruled for different reasons," but 
that there are many different views of what "overrule" means, and not 
dealing with this problem now could just make it really annoying 
later."

 

This is right on.  A short reading of the discussions taking place in this
forum demonstrates that some people are of the belief that when the Supreme
Court overrules itself it is akin to Congressional policymaking; however, it
is not.  The Supreme Court cannot simply "overrule" a decision in a vacuum
absent an account of the line of jurisprudence that has resulted from that
precedent and the specific circumstances of that ruling.  As such, I think
that Tim Mahoney's wording of "rule [x] unconstitutional" is best.

 

Just my two cents,

 

Geoff

 

Geoffrey J. Derrick

Northwestern University 2007

Honors in Legal Studies

Communications Studies

(978) 578-3990

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060529/78f3ef5c/attachment.html