Illustration shows a pendulum, where the spots on the pendulum are listed as “legal, less legal, more legal very legal.”

Text of this page says, : We rely on our laws being fairly consistent, so that we can plan our lives, act accordingly. If laws and, crucially, our Constitutional rights, live on a pendulum, they’re not workable.

Text says: Stare decisive is a legal concept that means “stand by things decided.” Stop sign in illustration says “STARE DECISIS, (you decided this already, stop!” Justices at the bottom of illustration are thinking “Ah yes, that’s right, we decided this years ago.”

Text of this page shows an equation that says: If legal issue A = legal issue B and A is legal, or a right, or a certain interpretation, THEN, because of stare decisis, B is legal, a right or that certain interpretation (the same as A).

Text of this page says: When courts answer questions about the law, they are expected to do so within the context of their past decisions. An illustration of the justices saying “In 1950, we sed red dots were legal, so these red dots must be legal too!”

The illustration shows a red dot that says “ok” on it, and underneath it says, “back then.” On the right, is another red dot, that says “today” and also “ok” on it. Because of stare decisis, they are treated the same.

Text of this page says: Stare decisis means courts aren’t in the business of overruling themselves, except in rare circumstances when the earlier decision or view was “wrong.”

Illustration shows the stare decisis stop sign saying “Only in the RAREST of circumstances, you hear me? Only in the rarest of circumstances.” Below is the Supreme Court comparing the two red dots.

Text of this page says: The court was WRONG to say that racial segregation laws were ok, so it overruled itself.

Illustration shows big red blob that says “Separate but equal, Plessy v. Ferguson” being torn apart by a Supreme Court justice saying “That was wrong.”

Text of this page says: And the court was wrong to say that laws criminalizing sexual activity between adults of the same sex was ok, so it overruled itself.

Illustration of Supreme Court justice tearing apart a blob that refers to the case in question. Justice is saying “WRONG.”

This page is only text and says: In the past, overruling moved us FORWARD, correcting interpretations that prolonged the inequality our country was founded on* and conflicted with the spirit of equality in our founding text and subsequent amendments. Is what’s “wrong” in the eye of the beholder? Sure, but…

Text of this page says: Now, by overruling Roe v. Wade (and the case that affirmed it in 1991) and taking away a fundamental right, the court has moved us BACKWARDS, to a time where the state can interfere heavily into personal decisions about our bodies, families, and futures.

Illustration shows Supreme Court saying, “we’ll take that back. Not yours anymore” and grabbing at a red blob, signifying a right. Woman looking angry is saying “Hey, we’ve relied on this for decades!”

Text of this page says: Not only do we have fewer rights than we did a few months ago, but we have a court that has made it clear that stare decisis- the respect for precedent - DOES NOT MATTER - if the issue is one that at least five of the justices don’t like.

Illustration shows a split Supreme Court, one of them saying “Precedent? Who cares!” And another one saying, “We are the law now!”