@houseoftolstoy

Although I am not suggesting that people break the age of consent or age of marriage laws

I would suggest that raising the age of consent and age of marriage laws except for special exceptions given by Kike Judges was part of a slippery slope to raise it to a higher and higher number so that it eventually becomes illegal for White Goyim to reproduce at any age meanwhile Kike Judges can grant exceptions for groups they want to allow to reproduce

India and China have older ages

The slippery slope isn't a fallacy, it's a thought experiment that explores the consequences of the application of a rule when it is interpreted as precedent with respect to similar rules. It seeks to discover the limitations of stare decisis.

@Humpleupagus @houseoftolstoy

"Search Assist

Stare decisis is a legal principle that requires courts to follow the precedents set by previous judicial decisions when ruling on similar cases. This doctrine promotes consistency and predictability in the law by ensuring that similar cases are decided in the same way."

some definition I copied and pasted

Does Stare Decisis also apply to laws congress passes or only decisions by judges

Its a jurisprudential doctrine, so really only cases / court.

Nonetheless, a good legislature would be knowledged of court decisions, including the courts application of statutory interpretation generally, and specifically as to certain laws, and word and phrases, in their relative context. So in a way, it would have an effect at the legislative level as well.

As for each chambers internal rules, you're crossing into alice in wonderland territory, and most people aren't ready for discussing the internal functioning of congress.

@Humpleupagus @houseoftolstoy

Adventures in legal land by Marc Stevens with a C and not a K

I may have misunderstood your question on a second reading. Yes. The rule would apply to a courts interpretation of a statute, and until such time as the statute was amended in such a way as to affect the interpretation.

The classic example is the 11th amendment, which was passed to overrule scotus' decision in Chisholm v. Georgia by changing the text of the constitution.

There are exceptions to the doctrine, like that a decision was made on bad factual information or lacked legal basis. This is why scotus was able to overrule Roe v. Wade.

A simple legal error that otherwise has a basis will typically not be disturbed though. The court will leave correction to the political process.

An inferior court cannot apply the exceptions to a decision by a superior Court. That should be obvious. Otherwise chaos. The rule would break down.

@shortstories @houseoftolstoy According the founding fathers were are meant to be that boundary via the 2nd amendment which we now know was wishful thinking

@karn @houseoftolstoy Your ideas? A slippery slope fallacy. My ideas? A domino effect.