Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-859new_kjfm.pdf
Page Number: 92

32 

SEC v. JARKESY 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

schemes,  regardless  of  any  perceived  resemblance  to  the 
common law, Congress enacted a new cause of action that 
created a statutory right belonging to the United States for 
the Government to enforce pursuant to its sovereign pow-
ers. 

IV 
A faithful and straightforward application of this Court’s
longstanding  precedent  should  have  resolved  this  case. 
Faithful “[a]dherence to precedent is ‘a foundation stone of 
the rule of law.’ ” Kisor v. Wilkie, 588 U. S. 558, 586 (2019) 
(quoting  Michigan  v.  Bay  Mills  Indian  Community,  572 
U. S. 782, 798 (2014)).  It allows courts to function, and be 
perceived, as courts, and not as political entities.  “ ‘It pro-
motes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent develop-
ment  of  legal  principles,  fosters  reliance  on  judicial  deci-
sions, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity 
of  the  judicial  process.’ ”    588  U. S.,  at  586–587  (quoting 
Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U. S. 808, 827 (1991); alterations 
omitted).  That is why, “even in constitutional cases, a de-
parture  from  precedent  ‘demands  special  justification.’ ”  
Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. 678, 691 (2019) (quoting 
Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U. S. 203, 212 (1984)).

Today’s  decision  disregards  these  foundational  princi-
ples.13  Time will tell what is left of the public-rights doc-

—————— 
859.  As those citations  demonstrate, both Justices  Brennan and Mar-
shall certainly thought that public-rights matters extend to certain pri-
vate disputes that do not involve the Government as a party, as well as 
disputes involving the Government in connection with different exercises 
of congressional power.  Indeed, it was Justice Brennan who reaffirmed 
Atlas Roofing in his opinion for the Granfinanciera Court and explained 
that a public  right includes, at a minimum, a statutory right that “be-
longs to [o]r exists against the Federal Government.”  492 U. S., at 53– 
54. 

13 Precedents should not be so easily discarded based on the views of