thathe's had all of these years on the bench, and she has in two notable cases, has not done anythingugely ntroversial. soou know what youe getting here. yet your point is that with the ca of justice blackman, justice stephens and others, justice souter most recently you don't necessarily know what you're gng to get when they ascend to the high cour >> the reas is quite clear, andrea. the preme court has informed and instructed all lower cour, you n't overrule anything, we do. you're bou within the parameters, the precedents we've given ou. and that is accepted. wh you're on the supreme court, you can votto revee opinions. you' not constrained. anreally, despite all this arguing about the decision stands in precedence, the cou really ovruled the precedent when witht wants to. me of them are applauded, brown versus board of education, some of them a viewed with grear chagri some ofhe decisis of the old warren court lending the eclusionary rule, but t court does this regularly. in its history, it'soveul maybe 250, 300 cases. and somef them are quite important. ey overred one case relating to race and wh