Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd., docket 16-399, J. Gorsuch, dissenting

Stare decisis:

(…) This Court has long made clear that where, as here, we have not “squarely addressed an issue, and have at most assumed one side of it to be cor­rect, we are free to address the issue on the merits.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619, 631 (1993); see also Legal Services Corporation v. Valazquez, 531 U. S. 533, 537 (2001) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (“Judicial decisions do not stand as binding ‘precedent’ for points that were not raised, not argued, and hence not analyzed”).

(U.S.S.C., June 23, 2017, Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd., docket 16-399, J. Gorsuch, dissenting).

A titre de rappel : la question litigieuse, résolue judiciairement, doit avoir été pleinement débattue et par les parties et par la cour pour valoir précédent.