Samuel Alito is criticized for not caring about facts and lacking impartiality as a Supreme Court Justice, particularly in the case of Roe v. Wade.
The importance of stare decisis in creating certainty and reliance in legal decisions is discussed, emphasizing the need for good cause to overturn precedents like Plessy v. Ferguson.
Criticism is directed at the rationale provided by Alito in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization for overruling Roe and Casey, particularly his rejection of the concept of reliance.
[
add
]
[
|
|
...
]