Justice Thomas Urges Rejecting Flawed Precedents

At a Sept. 25 appearance at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said stare decisis is not “talismanic” and warned the Court should not blindly follow precedent, likening unexamined deference to following a train driven by an “orangutan.” He argued precedents must be grounded in legal tradition and sound reasoning and defended the Court’s recent overrulings, including decisions on abortion and affirmative action. Thomas invoked Brown v. Board as an example of properly revisiting precedent. He highlighted upcoming high‑stakes matters — including a challenge to Humphrey’s Executor on removal limits for independent agencies, redistricting and Voting Rights Act litigation tied to Thornburg v. Gingles, questions about birthright citizenship, and a petition to revisit Obergefell — any of which could unsettle long‑standing law. His remarks signal continued openness among conservative justices to reconsider precedents they view as inconsistent with the Constitution and the nation’s legal traditions.