Marks v. U.S. question

[John Bickers]

Another recent example is Hamdi: the press called it 6-3, but it is really 4-2-2-1, with no two opinions further apart than those of Justices Scalia and Thomas, both of whom claim to be in dissent.  Justice Souter's 2, on the other hand, officially concurs in the plurality's judgment, but seems most to agree with the Justice Scalia 2, which is a "dissent."
 
Of course, after the opinion, the U.S. just sent Hamdi back home to Saudi Arabia, so I'm not sure the Administration could figure it out either...
 
John Bickers
Salmon P. Chase College of Law
Northern Kentucky University
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20081206/671a2b4b/attachment.htm