Congratulations to Sam Bray,

on having his "Necessary and Proper" and "Cruel and Unusual": Hendiadys in the Constitution, 102 Va. L. Rev. 687 (2016), cited in Justice Thomas's dissent yesterday in Trump v. Mazars USA. Nice!

Comments

[Martinned]

Very cool indeed, although I worry that being cited by Justice Thomas (and only Justice Thomas) might be the kiss of death for a legal argument, given how idiosyncratic Justice Thomas's approach to the constitution typically is.

[M L]

He's the best justice.

[Aladdin's Carpet]

Eh, usually ideas justice Thomas propagates either becomes mainstream among the right in a decade or two or is so extreme as to be completely forgotten about ... I believe, though Mazars dissent was a little extreme, Brays work will fall into the former category.

And ironically, it seems Thomas, despite being far outside the mainstream, is one of very few Justices who actually do literature searches. It's difficult to be cited by Alito for instance because ... does Alito read law reviews? I doubt it.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

I had to look it up, so here is what it means:
Hendiadys is a figure of speech used for emphasis—"The substitution of a conjunction for a subordination". The basic idea is to use two words linked by the conjunction "and" instead of the one modifying the other.

[mydisplayname]

I appreciate the work of both Bray and Thomas. I've found that it's mandatory to read the footnotes (and translator's notes) each authors: the crumbs left on the floor of the pages offer a quiet diplomacy -- an easily overlooked nuance -- satisfying to those who hunger for more than the meat-and-potatoes main course presented on the table. I will admit my own initial resistance to the style and attitude of Justice Thomas and will jokingly say that he has grown over the years, fully realizing that my palate has developed over those same years.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I expect Justice Thomas to become so unhinged during the Obama Court that he just might cite Prof. Bray in every dissent. For a right-winger in legal academia, that might be about as good as it gets for 20 years or so.

See you in November, clingers . . . then again in January.

Unless Prof. Volokh bans me again for making fun of conservatives.

[Martinned]

However much I would approve of a president Biden putting Obama on the Supreme Court (as long as they are capable of putting the law before their politics, a bit of political experience isn't a bad thing in a Supreme Court justice), I'm not sure how you envisage him making Obama Chief Justice. Putting a hit out on Roberts?