On November 15, 2019, the Federalist Society's Civil Rights Practice Group hosted a panel for the 2019 National Lawyers Convention at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The panel covered "Stare Decisis in Civil Rights Cases".
Stare decisis is generally regarded as a stronger force when applied to statutes than it is in constitutional law. The standard rationale is that it is much easier for the legislature to overrule statutory precedents than it is for the people to overrule constitutional precedents. But stare decisis has never been an absolute rule in either context. Has the Supreme Court been excessively reluctant to reconsider high-profile precedents that clearly misinterpreted the original meaning of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and similar statutes?
*******
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
Featuring:

Mr. Michael A. Carvin, Partner, Jones Day
Mr. William S. Consovoy, Partner, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC and Adjunct Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. William N. Eskridge, Jr., John A. Garver Professor of Jurisprudence, Yale Law School
Prof. Neil Kinkopf, Professor of Law, Georgia State University College of Law
Prof. Nelson Lund, University Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Moderator: Hon. Diane S. Sykes, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit