> The US is a common-law country. By stare decisis, the courts are indeed supposed to be bound by precedent.

And that doesn't work, and it didn't even work to start.

IIRC, in Britain, before the US was independent, "common law" became so unworkable and and unjust because the courts were so rigidly "bound" by precedent (like you advocate), that a whole other system of law "equity" was created.

You have misunderstood. The Supreme Court isn't bound by stare decisis. They are free to overturn precedent if they have appropriate rationale.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/publicat...