Osler's Razor

In watching the Supreme Court arguments yesterday, I felt a little tiny connection to the action. The two most animated and interesting Justices were Justice Stevens and Justice Scalia, who were particularly informed and engaged on the issue of jury rights at sentencing under mandatory sentencing regimes. Much of their discussion yesterday involved the Booker decision of last year, in which they struck down the mandatory federal sentencing guidelines as unconstitutional, effectively making those guidelines advisory rather than binding on lower courts.

The Booker decision was a thunderbolt in my field, and we all gobbled it up as fast as we could. In reading through it, I was shocked to find that Justice Stevens had quoted one of my articles in making his point in dissent. Now—and here is the good part—Justice Scalia joined Stevens in his dissent except the part in which Stevens quoted me, saying that Stevens improperly relied on “statements by various individuals.”

As I sat in the crowd watching them banter, I felt a little more like I fit in there, knowing that Justice Stevens had borrowed my words on the issue they were discussing and that Scalia had expressly rejected them.

Well, law law law, blah blah blah, hoodie hoodie hoo. Tomorrow is Haiku Friday! Be Prepared!