Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. United States District Court for the Western District of Texas posed a simple question: is the Supreme Court bound by precedent when interpreting procedural rules and statutes? Unfortunately, the Court did not offer a similarly simple answer. By only partially upholding its prior interpretations of the statutes and rules at issue, the Court demonstrated its ambivalence toward stare decisis in the civil procedure context. Although courts consistently recognize the heightened importance of stare decisis in construing nonprocedural statutes and rules, the Supreme Court has shown that it does not feel similarly bound in its civil procedure docket. As this comment concludes, the Court’s ambivalence toward stare decisis in interpreting procedural rules and statutes is unexplained and unjustified.