« COA Grant in Umali: Second Circuit To Consider Remedy for Burden-Shifting Jury Instruction | Main | Habeas Corpus - Cert. Grant in Habeas Case »

January 16, 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I've been waiting to read this blog's opinion of the decision ever since it was released. I have to admit that I was surprised to see that it was unanimous, but given Pinholser and Richter, I guess I shouldn't be. Should we expect to see more of the same when Johnson v. Williams gets decided later this term?

This is a really interesting perspective. I did not find the court's decision that crazy at first glance, but the points made in this post are hard to come across.

Recall DOD restricting Gitmo lawyers' access on the grounds that the lawyers are practically useless once the habeas applications have been litigated and denied. http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/09/judge-us-cant-set-limits-on-guantanamo-laywers-134726.html

I think the liberal justices had some tunnel vision in the context of this being a dilatory tactic in death penalty litigation. The indefinite nature of the stays really was the icing on the cake.

But realistically, I cannot ever imagine that a state's DOC could ever get away with denying / grossly restrict client visits under the Gonzales rationale. The Gonzales opinion could have been written in a way that acknowledges JK's concerns but distinguishes them away. But it did not. Nor did anyone write so much as a concurrence to ease these concerns.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad