We all know that Justices Scalia and Thomas have always written the best dissents and Justice Alito’s dissent in Smith is no exception. Even though Justice Alito avoided most of the classic traps of writing a dissenting opinion like excessively broad analysis and only barely touching on the issues that the majority addresses, he is simply too nice to write an opinion that really interests me. The only interesting part of the opinion is when Justice Alito inadvertently highlights the ludacris nature of federal constitutional error tests. He suggests that Smith was forced to meet the “plain error rule” instead of the “egregious harm standard”. If you’re ever bored, I suggest you establish your own legal test. All it takes is a non-specific adjective and a noun that sounds serious. Good Luck, may the best test win.

More on the Death Penalty Cases coming soon.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Traitors to the Cause: 6-3 decisions are, statistically speaking, the least common vote split. Frequently, those cases split along the ideological lines that are s...
  • Updated Term Statistics: I've updated the term statistics and you can find the new versions of each chart below: Complete (includes all three charts) --- Term I...
  • Frequency of Consecutive Opinions Release Days: I've taken a look at the number of opinion days in a given week from OT06 to OT10. In other words, I've taken a look at the number of times ...
  • New Opinions and Updated Statistics: The Supreme Court released three new opinions today and dismissed one hotly-anticipated case as improvidently granted. Graham v. Florida-...
  • A Classic Oral Argument Passage: Today's New York Times article about Paul Clement, "Lawyer Opposing Health Law is Familiar Face to the Justices", reminds me of an interesti...