Catch this NYT editorial yesterday? Boilerplate NYT, wringing its hands over the possibility that Samalito may not be a respecter of precedent. Funny, I don't recall the formerly Grey Lady requiring any smelling salts when:
- the Casey decision overturned two previous abortion decisions.
- the Lawrence decision overturned Bowers v. Hardwick, striking down sodomy laws.
- NRLB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel struck down Lochner, which had prevented the government from enacting labor laws.
- Or --most famously-- Brown overturned Plessy, ending legal segregation.
As my crony points out, the Court has overturned 225 of its own decisions --more than one each year. The Times should tell us which of these cases they consider "extreme" and "out of the mainstream" because they disrespected precedent.
The real question is not precedent, but rights. Justices should respect precedents that uphold constitutionally protected rights and overturn those that do not.
