“Legal practice also taught me the importance of 
    stability in the law. A lawyer must be able to advise her 
    clients based upon the existing case law. Courts should 
    give proper consideration to the text as agreed upon, the 
    law as written, and applicable precedent. Then our system 
    of justice can achieve appropriate stability, clarity, 
    and predictability. Those values cannot be effectively 
    pursued unless the law and the facts determine the 
    outcome of a case, rather than the identity of the judge 
    before whom a case is brought. Time and again, I saw that 
    principle in real world cases. The importance of the rule 
    of law, as opposed to peculiarities of specific judges, 
    was just as critical in small matters involving 
    individuals as it was big litigation involving millions 
    of dollars…

    Judicial review by the Supreme Court, including 
    determining the meaning of the Constitution and declaring 
    unconstitutional the actions of another branch of 
    government, is a tremendous power exercised by judges who 
    are not accountable to the electorate. Because their  
    power is so great, and because it is largely unchecked, 
    judges must be vigilant in exercising their power in a 
    humble, prudent, and limited way. The courts must always 
    be ready to decide cases according to the Constitution 
    and laws of the United States, and to do so fairly and 
    without regard to the wealth or power of the litigants 
    before them. But it is just as important for the courts 
    to stand ready not to decide in instances that do not 
    call for a decision.”