@Demosthenes – “No clear cut rule for what precedent is, and what rulings should be re-examined”?
Have you actually read Alioto’s ruling in Dobbs v Jackson? I’d suggest you do that. Because even if you don’t care about abortion rights (because hey, no womb no worries), I bet gay marriage hits a little closer to home. And that’s next on the hit list.
So get familiar with this way of thinking:
“In this case, five factors weigh strongly in favor of overruling Roe and Casey: the nature of their error, the quality of their reasoning, the ‘workability’ of the rules they imposed on the country, their disruptive effect on other areas of the law, and the absence of concrete reliance.” – Alioto, Majority opinion.
And here’s the preview of coming attractions :
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” – Thomas, Concurring opinion.
So the “rules” in this case are in plain sight, and they’re as twisted as the rotten politics we’ve all lived through for the last 15 years.