Comments on: Today’s Opinions

By: Celebrity Cruise Lines

Celebrity Cruise Lines — Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:56:11 +0000

Celebrity Cruise Lines

Celebrity Cruise Lines – one of the best cruises with comfortable ships. Best regards.

By: Royal Caribbean Cruise: Voyager of the Seas

Royal Caribbean Cruise: Voyager of the Seas — Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:07:11 +0000

Voyager of the Seas

Royal Caribbean Cruise: Voyager of the Seas – one of the best Caribbean cruise!!!

By: Jacob

Jacob — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:40:18 +0000

Ben Kennedy: There is no Apprendi problem here, as the previous conviction was surely alleged in the indictment, and a jury would have been required to affirm the existence of the Japanese conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. If Small had gone the other way, it would likely have held that a foreign conviction can make gun possession illegal, no matter what jury and due process procedures are used internationally. The finding of fact by the jury would be the simple existence of the forign conviction, no matter how unfair. In this case, the point is moot, as Small pleaded guilty anyway, reserving the right to challenge the legal significance of his Japanese conviction, not its existence.

By: Ben Kennedy

Ben Kennedy — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:52:42 +0000

It seems like they could have attacked the conviction with Apprendi-style logic here as well – if sentence enhancments based on facts not discovered by a jury are unconstitutional, would it not stand to reason that so would a law that does essentially the same thing, that is statutorily incarcerate people based on part facts not stipulaed to by the defendant or established by a US jury?

By: The Debate Link

The Debate Link — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:21:25 +0000

Which Way Will They Go?

SCOTUS Blog gives links to today’s Supreme Court opinions, and, more importantly, alerts us to the opinions still to come. This was the part that intrigued me though

By: phil

phil — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:16:07 +0000

SimonD: perhaps because while Breyer is willing to look to foreign case law as persuasive authority, there is no room for mere persuasiveness in interpreting criminal statutes.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 21:37:57 +0000

Is Pasquantino a third first time lineup of justices this term?

By: Law Dork

Law Dork — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:51:40 +0000

SCOTUS Watch

From Marty Lederman at SCOTUSblog: From the December sitting, four opinions are outstanding: three from important constitutional cases — Ashcroft v. Raich (which was actually argued on November 29th, technically at the beginning of the “December” sitt…

By: New World Man - put your message in a modem

New World Man - put your message in a modem — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:17:39 +0000

Mr. Justice Thomas relies on foreign law!

I doubt I’m the first and am sure I won’t be the last to make this clever observation about two opinions delivered by the Court today. In Small v. U.S., Thomas dissented, joined by Scalia and Kennedy. Federal law prohibits any person “who has been conv…

By: SimonD

SimonD — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:57:35 +0000

Justice Breyer notes: “They would include a conviction from a legal system that
is inconsistent with an American understanding of fairness” (page 4). I don’t quite follow the logic here: if Justice Breyer is concerned with the fairness of rulings of Courts in other countries, and their applicability to legal procedings within the United States, why is Jutice Breyer the Court’s leading proponent of citing foreign case law?

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:48:13 +0000

From the November sitting, doesn’t Ashcroft v. Raich remain to be decided?

ML responds: Well, technically Raich is in the “December” sitting, although you’re correct that it was argued on November 29th, the beginning of that sitting. From the December sitting, three important constitutional cases remain — Raich, Granholm v. Heald, and Veneman v. Livestock Marketing — as does Miller-El v. Dretke. Of those four opinions, Justices Stevens, Kennedy, and Souter are likely writing at least one majority apiece, and Justice O’Connor almost certainly is not writing a majority. (Perhaps I’ll add that info to the main post, too.)