Abstract
In the Passenger Cases Chief Justice Taney expressed his willingness always to reconsider his Court’s constitutional doctrines. In Dickerson v. United States the Court declined to do as Chief Justice Taney said he would have done and adhered to Miranda v. Arizona without saying whether a majority of the Justices believed Miranda to have been correctly decided as an original matter. Suppose that some time between the Taney and Rehnquist Courts Congress had adopted a statute purporting to codify Chief Justice Taney’s suggestion by providing that the Supreme Court shall depart from its precedents whenever it believes them to be incorrect.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
