It has been argued that the doctrine of "stare decisis" is regarded by legal scholars as that factor that enables "law" to remain detached from "politics."
Yet, policy making, by definition, necessarily involves politics. Is it possible to reconcile theses two statements?
If stare decisis is not the principle by which judicial decisions are formulated, how else can we account for judicial outcomes?
In developing your response, be sure to use substantive examples (in particular citing the case law from Griggs to Wards Cove)