Reply #168: Two phrases.

[Igel]

"Stare decisis" and "settled law."

These were big deals. It was essential that settled law remain settled. Stare decisis must rule. It's crucial, essential, all civilization would end, one would think, if these principles were not upheld. It's a principle, dammit, and no judge should be confirmed that does not admit such fundamental facts. They want to up-end 30-year-old precedents? No f**king way!

Oh. What's that? Stare decisis? Settled law?

Eh. We like where Sotomayor's thinking takes us. Screw our previous rhetoric--there's no principle involved, no fundamental anything. What, people actually took us seriously? The idiots. We sure tricked them. Aren't we supposed to speak power to truth?

So next time a politician says that stare decisis is important, that there is such a thing as settled law, we can scoff. "Fool."