Supreme Court, Led by Justice Thomas, Reconsiders Landmark Precedents Including 1935 Independent Agency Protections

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has publicly challenged the traditional respect for legal precedent, known as stare decisis, emphasizing that it should not be blindly followed if it conflicts with the Constitution or legal traditions. In recent appearances and statements, Thomas has argued that precedents must be critically evaluated and that the court should not treat past rulings as "gospel," illustrating his point with an analogy that warns of blindly following a train without knowing who is driving it. This perspective comes as the Supreme Court prepares to reconsider major precedents, including the potential revisiting of decisions on marriage equality and other rights related to private consensual conduct. Thomas's views support a broader conservative judicial approach, as seen in recent landmark reversals such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, and the dismantling of affirmative action and Chevron deference. His comments reflect a judicial philosophy that prioritizes constitutional fidelity over adherence to established rulings, signaling possible future shifts in Supreme Court jurisprudence. These discussions also coincide with a case concerning the limits of presidential authority over independent federal agencies, where the court may overturn a nearly century-old precedent restricting such power.