ABSTRACT
There is a fundamental distinction to be drawn at the outset of any comparative discussion of the rationale for respecting precedents. A similar rationale for the normative force of precedent concerns fundamental constitutional and politico-moral values. The German and Spanish constitutional courts have likewise held that equality before the law cannot be supposed to mandate an absolute bindingness of precedent. One upshot of the foregoing discussion might be to suggest the need for a decidedly non-monolithic approach to the concepts of precedent and of stare decisis. Scepticism about the determinacy of precedent has a long history, especially but not only in the United States. New York exhibits, and the United States taken as a whole exhibits yet more, one of the features of concern in the European civilian systems, namely a plurality of courts exercising coordinate or parallel jurisdiction in a geographically defined area, even at the penultimate level of appeals.
