Ramos v. Louisiana
Supreme Court of the United States
1Concurrence · SotomayorJustice Sotomayor
I agree with most of the Court's rationale, and so I join all but Part IV-A of its opinion. I write separately, however, to underscore three points. First, overruling precedent here is not only warranted, but compelled. Second, the interests at stake point far more clearly to that outcome than those in other recent cases. And finally, the racially biased origins of the Louisiana and Oregon laws uniquely matter here.
I
Both the majority and the dissent rightly emphasize that stare decisis "has been a fundamental part of our jurisprudence since the founding." Post , at 1432 (opinion of ALITO,…
Also in this document: Concurrence · Kavanaugh; Concurring in the judgment; Dissent.
2Cases cited159 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
154 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,007 opinions
- McGirt v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- State v. Flores RamosOregon Supreme Court · 2020
- State v. UleryOregon Supreme Court · 2020
- Cook v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2022
- June Medical Services L. L. C. v. RussoSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
1,002 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.