Walter Shaub @waltshaub former Director of @OfficeGovEthics now with @CREWcrew personal account - views are my own May. 13, 2019 1 min read

"Stare decisis does not compel continued adherence to this erroneous precedent.”

Translation for non-lawyers: "We don't have to follow precedents we disagree with." This may water down the concept of "precedent."

Justice Breyer's dissent concludes: "Today's decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the court will overrule next."

Translation for non-lawyers: "I'm not saying you should necessarily freak out yet, but I'm not saying it would be unreasonable to freak out."

You can follow @waltshaub.


Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.

Enjoy Threader? Sign up.

Threader is an independent project created by only two developers. The site gets 500,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Running this space is expensive and time consuming. If you find Threader useful, please consider supporting us to make it a sustainable project.