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

  • Four 8-1 Decisions in One Day: The Supreme Court released four opinions today, and each was 8-1. You can find all of the opinions here. CompuCredit v. Greenwood, a case...
  • A Big Little Case: Next Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in an interesting case about water law in Montana, PPL Montana v. Montana. The case wi...
  • 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....
  • Nearly Final Term Statistics and Advocate Scorecard: My goal was to publish the final term statistics today, but because the Court will hear rearguments in Citzens United and likely issue an op...
  • Advocate Scorecard for OT 09: I finished this a while ago but neglected to post it until now. Whoops? Anyways, here is the OT 09 advocate scorecard with win/loss record. ...