Which statement is true about the doctrine of precedent?

The doctrine of precedent, also known as stare decisis, is a fundamental principle in common law legal systems whereby courts are bound to follow the precedents set by previous court decisions. This ensures consistency and predictability in the law.

The statement that it is binding on all courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, is accurate because the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions act as binding precedent for all lower federal and state courts. When a legal issue has been settled by the Supreme Court, lower courts must adhere to that ruling in similar cases, thereby fortifying the doctrine of precedent as a central component of the legal system.

In contrast, the other statements do not accurately capture the nature of the doctrine. While the doctrine primarily applies within the jurisdiction of each court level—state or federal—it is not limited to state courts alone. It is far-reaching within the realm of judicial law interpretation. Additionally, the doctrine is not restricted to criminal cases; it is relevant in both civil and criminal law contexts. Finally, stating that it is an optional guideline for judges misrepresents its binding nature; judges are required to follow established precedents unless there is a compelling reason to overturn them.