From Judge Wilson's concurrence in Friday's Dershowitz v. CNN, Inc. (and see also Judge Barbara Lagoa's concurrence taking the opposite view ):

"Fidelity to precedent—the policy of stare decisis —is vital to the proper exercise of the judicial function." I believe that Sullivan reflects "the accumulated wisdom of judges who have previously tried to solve the same problem."

To be sure, our understanding of the First Amendment should be guided by its original meaning and heed common law traditions. But "ambiguous historical evidence" does not justify casting aside a unanimous Supreme Court decision and nearly sixty years of settled precedent. The "real-world consequences" and reliance interests at stake counsel us to pump the brakes before calling to overrule Sullivan ….

Adherence to prec

See Full Page