Issue: (1) Whether, in order to demonstrate that evidentiary
errors in a capital sentencing proceeding were harmless,
the government must establish that the errors did not
affect the verdict of the jury that actually heard the case
or whether the government may instead meet its burden
by demonstrating that such errors would not have affected
a hypothetical, reasonable jury; and (2) whether, under the cumulative error doctrine, a
reviewing court must reverse if the government cannot
establish that preserved errors are harmless beyond a
reasonable doubt, or is reversal required only if the errors
“so fatally infect[ed] the trial that they violated the trial’s
“I think always the humor was a means to an end. And the end is, to help folks who don’t live in this world understand why it matters.” Dahlia Lithwick covers the Supreme Court and writes about law more broadly for Slate.com. In this six-part interview, Ms. Lithwick discusses law school, practicing law, and how […]
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.