Stare decisis can produce internally inconsistent patterns of decision

Evidence

In Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc., was the Court right in following rather than overruling its prior decision in Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. Ntional L of Professional Clubs? Did it give proper weight to its prior decision in Hart v. B.F. Keith Vaudeville Exchange? … In United States v. Shubert, was the Court right in treating Hart and the motion picture cases as ncontrolling” and Federal Baseball and Tool- … In United States v. International Boxing Club of New York, Inc., was the Court right in again holding Federal Basebal. and Toolson in applicable while at the same time again treating them as good law? … If Toolson, Shubert, and International Boxing, had all came before the Court at the same time and each as presenting a question of first impression, could each have been decided as it actually was? If not, does the doctrine of stare decisis nevertheless justify the resulting pattern of decision? — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2866

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Stare decisis, unlike repose doctrines, wrongly perpetuates future inequality. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3113; Stare decisis requires treating prior decisions as binding regardless of perceived correctness. — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 106; Stated precedent rules often fail to determine later case outcomes — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 216

Broader Connections

• Stated precedent rules often fail to determine later case outcomes #corroborates (0.85) — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 216
• Stare decisis requires treating prior decisions as binding regardless of perceived correctness. #expands (0.80) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 106