|
Yes, it has. In fact, the highest court in the United States has proved unafraid to change its mind. In one of the most legendary examples, the Supreme Court reversed its stance on the matter of racial segregation. In the 1896 case Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court ruled that "separate but equal" laws were acceptable for blacks and whites. This decision essentially gave Jim Crow laws the full backing of the Court. But times changed, social norms shifted, and by 1954 the Supreme Court took a very different view of civil rights. That year, in deciding the case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,
Kansas, the justices unanimously rejected the doctrine of "separate but equal." And with that, they quashed the Plessy v. Ferguson verdict. More recently, the Court rebuffed its own stance on anti-sodomy laws. In the 1986 case Bowers v. Hardwick, the justices voted to uphold states' laws that criminalized homosexual activity. But in 2003, the Supreme Court "explicitly" rejected that judgment when it ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that the Lone Star state's law barring sex between two consenting, same-gender adults was
unconstitutional. You would never accuse the Court of being wishy-washy, though. According to About.com, the Supreme Court usually wants a case to present "different or new facts." So, though it has reversed itself on cases, it must see a clear reason to do so.
|
