�������t¶��

All said they respected stare decisis, the principle that justices should be guided by the decisions made by previous courts, such as Roe and Planned Parenthood vs.

Barry Friedman, a law professor at New York University and the author of a 2010 article on “stealth overruling,” said such data have limitations in assessing the court’s commitment to the principle of stare decisis, legal Latin for “to stand by things decided.”

“You can’t look at historical figures about stare decisis and know anything,” he said, “because sometimes courts and justices are honest about overruling precedent and sometimes they are not.”

United States, declined to overrule Miranda because “stare decisis weighs heavily against overruling it now.”

Given Thomas’ famous disdain for stare decisis, it is mysterious, at best, that he relied on two such plainly erroneous precedents, which contradicted the plain text of the applicable rules.