January 13, 2005
Collected Booker commentary
I am about to hit the road to travel to North Carolina to do a faculty workshop at the UNC School of Law, and thus I will have to be off-line the rest of the day. (Thanks for the great timing, SCOTUS!) Also, the blog service has been cranky today, so my apologies for the comments feature not always working. (Thanks for the great timing, Typepad!)
Nevertheless, I have been able to collect below all my substantive Booker posts so far, which now also include nearly 200 comments from readers (which are often substantial, always insightful, and sometimes truly brilliant). By the time you read and digest all that, as well as all the media pieces here and here and here, and all the blog coverage here and here (with Orin Kerr having another great take here), I should be back on-line.
- The FSG are dead, long live the FSG!!
- The power of parsimony (and Justice Breyer's notable omission)
- Quick retroactivity thoughts
- The revenge of Breyer
- What of substantial assistance?
- Questions and omissions
- The remedy mess
- Rule by judges?
- Take a deep breath.....
- A brief Booker break (sort of)
- SCOTUS speaks: Booker and Fanfan have arrived!!
January 13, 2005 at 01:15 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Collected Booker commentary:
Just wanted to give my openion in the current
decision on Brooker etc...
When the decision was made that this IS unconstitutional our government needs to make this retroactive. If I was telling the Government that we failed to pay taxes (and I know we don't have to pay these) they not only make me pay back taxes, but they add interest onto it. Why is this so different? This is just one example of the Government making sure they get ALL OF THERE'S, however when it comes to WE THE PEOPLE, 95.5 percent of the time WE THE PEOPLE get screwed and hard! The Government is no longer out for WE THE PEOPLE, they are out for the power of one that empower ‘the selected few’ under the pretense of being a Government. With this being said it’s not going to be hard to see how this will pan out. It all comes down to how they can get, steal, and keep what they have. $$$
Posted by: Michele | Jan 13, 2005 2:09:43 PM
Anyone notice that snuck into the majority opinion is language, albeit dicta, that seemingly holds that calls into question the death penalty scheme in a wide number of states as to weighing of aggs v. mits, as well as the special questions scheme in Texas?
Posted by: karl | Jan 13, 2005 2:51:37 PM