Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

publishedVersion

Publication Date

6-2020

Abstract

Judicial precedents in constitutional law raiseunique stare decisis considerations. While they are authoritative pronouncementson the proper interpretation of the Constitution and are thus an essentialcomponent of constitutional law, they are also merely judicial precedents – andthus susceptible to being overturned. These considerations have been thesubject of a well-developed body of literature, especially in the context of USSupreme Court constitutional precedents.Yet, despite being a constitutional supremacy, little attention has beenpaid in Singapore to the question of the proper judicial approach towardsconstitutional precedents. This paper aims to address this issue. It will discernthe de facto principles that Singapore judges have thus far applied intheir considerations of constitutional precedents, engage with the insights ofUS jurisprudence on the proper approach to stare decisis in constitutional law,and finally, propose a legal framework that can guide principled stare decisisanalysis in Singapore constitutional law.

Keywords

Singapore, constitutional law, stare decisis, precedent, Planned Parenthood v Casey, US Supreme Court

Discipline

Constitutional Law | Courts

Research Areas

Public Law

Publication

Journal of International and Comparative Law

Volume

7

Issue

1

First Page

127

Last Page

153

ISSN

2313-3775

Publisher

Sweet and Maxwell

Download

Share

COinS