Read Dickerson.
Read the Constitution. You seem to be doing everything but.
Stare decisis will justify not overruling a prior case unless there are special circumstances.
So Brown was incorrect? Instead of reading the Constitution, the Court should have relied on stare decisis to justify upholding segregation?
Keeping millions of people in quasi-bondage under segregation would certainly count as sufficient circumstances justifying the overruling of a precedent that permitted segregation.
Killing millions of unborn babies would certainly count as sufficient circumstances justifying the overruling of a precedent that denied states the right to establish their own laws.