Notable criminal law perspectives on Justices old and new

Around the blogosphere are some interesting new posts on some criminal law work by current and likely future Supreme Court Justices.

First, David Oscar Markus explains in this interesting post why he views Justice Scalia as "by far the most friendly Justice to criminal defendants."   I think David's perspective is a bit too skewed by Justice Scalia's strong rhetoric when he (only sometimes) votes for a criminal defendant, David makes this sound point on the interesting topicof criminal law and stare decisis:

I'm happy when Justice Scaliaisn't a prisoner to stare decisis.  If he was, we wouldn't have Crawford, Blakely, Gant, etc. I'm glad he's questioning cases that have been on the books for years because the law is more pro-government right now than it has ever been. The pendulum has started swinging back the other way, and it's due in part to Justice Scalia.  Yes, criminal defendants are going to lose some too -- like Michigan v. Jackson -- but I'll take the above cases with that one.

Second, Kent Scheidegger has this helpful posttitled "Judge Sotomayor and AEDPA."  Here are some  highlights Kent's review of the SCOTUS nominee's record in this arena:

I decided to focus on this statute for several reasons. Decisions by federal judges under this law involve important questions of federalism. The Supreme Court's docket has been heavy with AEDPA cases ever since it was enacted.

The law is bitterly resented by many federal judges precisely because it was enacted to curtail their ability to lord it over state courts and because it rejected the notion that their judgments are inherently superior. Many, many federal judges have attempted to evade it, and a few have gone so far as to declare it unconstitutional. All of the latter have been reversed.  Reversing the evasions has been a major part of the Supreme Court's workload, although, as one judge boasted, they can't reverse them all....

Throughout [Judge Sotomayor's]  opinions, I do not see the hostility to AEDPA that I have seen in so many opinions in the lower federal courts. The statute is largely applied as written and as intended....  On the whole, these are well-considered, well-written opinions that apply the language of the statute and the precedents of higher courts, easily within the limits in which reasonable people may differ. 

Prior posts on the SCOTUS nomination and record of Judge Sotomayor:

• Some very early, very brief sentencing reflections on Judge Sotomayor
• A quick thought on Judge Sotomayor's sentencing work in Cavera
• Noting early unpublished sentencing opinions from Judge Sotomayor
• Judge Sotomayor on textualism and voting rights in Hayden v. Pataki
• President Obama to nominate Judge Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court
• Notable background parallels between Judge Sotomayor and Justice Alito