Michael Dorf has an interesting post explaining why he thinks Justice Thomas (joined by Justice Scalia) was correct to argue that the Court should have accepted certiorari in Noriega v. Pastrana. Professor Dorf concludes:
What I admire about Justice Thomas’s Noriega dissent is that he presents the legal issues without even hinting that he thinks the underlying claim is meritless. And you can be pretty sure that if I think the claim is a loser, Justice Thomas thinks so too.
John Elwood blogged on the Noriega case here.
B.D. says:
*crickets chirping*
I guess it’s hard to get people jazzed about habeas corpus.
Noriega is so 80s.
Quote
January 26, 2010, 7:59 pmRoger the Shrubber says:
That sentence needs some work, I think.
[You’re right. I fixed it. — JHA]
Quote
January 26, 2010, 11:37 pmJeff (theCRICKETtoy®) Anderson says:
Great response. Of course, I’m ‘obviously’ a little biased.
I’m a fan of anyone talking about crickets chirping.
Jeff Anderson
theCRICKETtoy®
Anytime there is an awkward pause in a conversation, push the button on theCRICKETtoy® and you’ll hear “Chirp. Chirp.” (crickets chirping)
Quote
January 27, 2010, 10:16 amThe Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » The Evenhandedness of Justice Thomas’s Noriega dissent says:
[...] Jonathan Adler notes below, Michael Dorf comments favorably on the evenhandedness of Justice Thomas’s description in his [...]