Passage A: The doctrine of stare decisis, or the principle of following precedent, is the bedrock of a stable legal system. It ensures that the law is predictable and that similar cases are decided in a similar manner over time. This consistency allows individuals and businesses to plan their affairs with confidence, knowing how courts are likely to interpret the law. While precedent is not an inexorable command, the bar for overturning a previous decision should be extremely high, requiring a showing that the original ruling was not just wrong, but fundamentally unworkable or deeply harmful.

Passage B: A rigid adherence to precedent can be a barrier to justice, forcing courts to repeat the errors of the past long after they have been recognized as such. The primary duty of a judge is to interpret the Constitution and the laws correctly, not to maintain a false sense of stability by upholding flawed decisions. When a prior ruling is found to be inconsistent with the underlying principles of justice or the text of the law, it should be corrected immediately. Blindly following precedent at the expense of correctness undermines the legitimacy of the judiciary by making the law appear stagnant and unresponsive to truth.