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

  • Updated Term Stats: Term Index Vote Breakdown Vote Breakdown Stats --- You can see from the Term Index that Justice Stevens is the most likely author of...
  • A Deeper Look at Reversal Rates: An article in today's Cincinati Enquirer highlights the Sixth Circuit's current 15-case losing streak in the Supreme Court. Circuits regular...
  • Profile: H. Bartow Farr, III: In the past, we've profiled notable advocates and judges that were in the news. This is the first in a series of posts about the advocates w...
  • Advocate Scorecard for OT00-Present: This weekend, I went through all the oral argument transcripts from OT00 through OTO8 and I counted how many times each of the major advocat...
  • More Sophisticated Reconferencing Statistics: A commentator on my last conferencing post picked up on an important part of the distribution question that I had intentionally omitted....