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

  • Uninterrupted Distributions Count for OT10 Cases: Docket pages for each case at the Supreme Court list when a case is distributed for a given conference and, therefore, up for consideration....
  • 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 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...
  • Belated Decade Advocate Scorecard: For one reason or another, it looks like I forgot to post my updated advocate scorecard for the decade at the end of the last term. Origin...
  • Another Addition to the Two-in-a-Month Club: Former Solicitor General Gregory Garre is scheduled to argue twice during the December sitting, a relatively uncommon feat for private pract...