David French

And one of the things about precedent is that one of the calculations when it comes to precedent is something called reliance interests.

How much has society, how much have people shaped their decisions?

How much is the economy shaped by a particular arrangement, etc.

?

And so when there has been an enormous amount of reliance, stare decisis, that's the weight we give precedent, gets more weighty.

It gets more potent.

And so I think that there's a lot of reasons why the Supreme Court has said Fed's different.

Fed's different.

Yeah, you know, that's why it's just wrong to think of like the law like you would think of a science.

Now, there are some parts of the law that are

That are routinely applied every day uncontroversially.

Like one of the things I talk to people, you know, what's one of the biggest misconceptions about the law?

And I say, well, one of the biggest misconceptions is that every case is in doubt or every case is controversial.

Most cases, vast majority, for example, of court of appeals cases are decided 3-0.

Ideological alignments don't matter.

So there's an enormous amount of law that is just...

almost wrote in its application.

It's just, okay, once you learn it, you apply it, it's done.

But then there's another sliver, which happens to be the most controversial.

These are the Supreme Court cases.