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

  • Advocates who have argued twice during a single sitting (OT03-Present): In honor of Carter Phillips arguing twice during the December sitting of the Court, I've compiled a list of every instance of this phenomeno...
  • 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-...
  • Term Index Updated: I've updated the Term Case Index to reflect the four opinions handed down this week. Earlier today I released opinion authorship statistics ...
  • Advocate Watch: With the Term quickly approaching it's midway point, we can take a look at which advocates have made the biggest mark on the Term. Hearing L...
  • Updated Term Charts: Starting this week, I'll be posting my updated charts on SCOTUSblog. You can find the first SB version of my charts here. More spec...