Today in Supreme Court History: January 23, 1915

1/23/1915: Justice Potter Stewart born.

Justice Potter Stewart

 

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (decided January 23, 2012): attaching a GPS device to suspected drug dealer’s vehicle (actually his wife’s) is a “search” of “effects” and therefore warrant needed

Ryburn v. Huff, 565 U.S. 469 (decided January 23, 2012): police entitled to qualified immunity for warrantless search when they went to house of student who had threatened to “shoot up” the school and when mother answered door and was asked if they had any guns she ran back inside

National Meat Ass’n v. Harris, 565 U.S. 452 (decided January 23, 2012): Federal Meat Inspection Act preempted California Penal Code as to slaughter and sale of “nonambulatory” animals (federal regulations allow sale of suitable parts after post-mortem inspection) (I am the son of a butcher and this nauseated even me)

Reynolds v. United States, 565 U.S. 432 (decided January 23, 2012): requirements of Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act do not apply to those convicted before the Act became law (July 27, 2006) unless (under the terms of the Act) the Attorney General so specifies (which he did on February 28, 2007); A.G. had been given discretion because of the plethora of pre-Act sex offenders to whom 50 different state registration laws applied

Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., 546 U.S. 394 (decided January 23, 2006): Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 50 ties not just the trial court’s hands but also the appellate court’s: if, after motion for directed verdict (50(a)) no motion is made postverdict for judgment NOV and new trial (50(b)), then appellate court can’t enter judgment NOV nor order a new trial (issue at trial was allegedly fraudulently obtained patent, and the Tenth Circuit, whose procedural law applied, had previously ruled that a 50(b) motion did not have to be made)

[defaultdotxbe]

When my brother was in jail he told me the kitchen would prepare their meals with boxes of meat labeled "Not for human or animal consumption. Inmates only"

I wonder if that comes from these nonambulatory animals that are graded condemned, or from some other source (like spoiled meat). Either way it did wonders for his morale while behind bars.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

We used to get "sterilized milk" (like evaporated or condensed milk, seemed worse, but might have just been our imaginations) in the Navy (73-76) which was usually a year old and had expired six months before. We'd use it on cereal and coffee only, lots of sugar, and lots of jokes too.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Sterilized" milk sounds like an early version of the "ultrapasteurized" milk today that doesn't need to be refrigerated. It does taste different, but then standard pasteurized milk tastes different from raw milk.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That's a rumor that's been kicking around colleges for years, that the dining commons serve a sub-grade meat. I don't believe it.

[Noscitur a sociis]

This is some pretty powerful corroboration for this otherwise obviously apocryphal story.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Uhhh .... did you miss the part where he said he doesn't believe it?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I do not doubt that the fledgling misfits and budding conspiracy theorists huddled in desolate cafeteria corners on campus trade plenty of stories.

You don't need to feel so bad for them, though . . . in a few years, they'll find a supportive community at the Volokh Conspiracy, at Trump rallies, and at Stormfront.

[Magister]

Uhhh …. did you miss the part where he said he doesn’t believe it?

Did you miss the part where it was Dr. Ed 2, famed for being wrong?

[Life of Brian]

Wrong about there being a rumor to that effect? Apparently Snopes made it up just to debunk it!

[Magister]

I'm not certain that it was Noscitur a sociis's intent, but I took it as meaning that Dr. Ed 2 not believing that the story is true could be taken as evidence that there might be something to it, because of the frequency with which Dr. Ed 2 is wrong. Nothing to do with "wrong about there being a rumor to that effect".

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

It's wrong because Dr Ed said so, so Dr Ed is famous for being wrong?

Are you serious?

[Estragon]

At least he didn’t propose driving a snow plow through the dining hall

[Magister]

1. It's a joke (at least my comment based on my interpretation of the comment from Noscitur a sociis is), so no, I'm not serious. Do you have a sense of humor?
2. Dr. Ed 2 regularly makes absurdly wrong comments. Therefore one should approach even his likely statements with caution. Again, do you have a sense of humor? Or at least a rudimentary grasp of logic, cause and effect, or the flow of time?

[Noscitur a sociis]

No, I did not.

[John F. Carr]

Somebody who worked in a cafeteria in the mid-1960s told me the incoming meat was high quality and the cooks turned it into cafeteria food.

In an episode of MASH the main cast spends a summer growing corn and gives the crop to an Army cook. Bad idea.

I am sure the quality of ingredients and cooks varies widely. When I was a freshman the food was good. Next year the school outsourced food service and the food was bad.

[Dilan Esper]

A.G. had been given discretion because of the plethora of pre-Act sex offenders to whom 50 different state registration laws applied

Not really. That was the cover story. The AG was given discretion because the Congress didn't have the votes to do it. Which is a good example of why Rightie concerns about delegations aren't completely out to lunch-- if you want to authorize throwing a bunch of people into prisons for long extended sentences, Congress, and not a prosecutor whose self interest is to always say "authorize the power to extend sentences", should be the one who does it.

[Dr. Ed 2]

What I don't understand is how these sex offender registration laws aren't ex post facto when applied to convictions that took place before the passage of the law. Same thing with the domestic violence ban on gun ownership -- a lot of people in the past plead guilty because it was cheaper than hiring an attorney, with no knowledge that doing so would have these consequences later.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Because sex offender registration laws aren't considered criminal punishment for purposes of the ex post facto clause. See Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (2003).

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Yeah, another reason to hate lawyers, like saying dual state and federal trials for the same crime aren't double jeopardy, or allowing civil trials for action that was acquitted in a criminal trial.

Lawyers have no more interest in justice than politicians.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Do you recognize an exception for lawyers who habitually publish vile racial slurs?

[Mr. Bumble]

Or lawyers posting comments posing as a clergy man?

[ReaderY]

Where does he do his posing? At Costco?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The Congregation Of Exalted Reason is the religion of the future in America.

[SRG2]

allowing civil trials for action that was acquitted in a criminal trial.

That's not unreasonable given the different standard of proof. Perhaps juries should be allowed to record a verdict of "actually innocent" in a criminal trial and no civil trial could follow thereafter.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Only a lawyer could think that reasonable. To everyone else, it's double jeopardy. OJ may have gotten the results he deserved, KKK and Rev Art bigots may have gotten the results they deserved, but it's still double jeopardy.

[David Nieporent]

No. At no point in history was a civil suit for damages considered jeopardy.

[Voize]

It's not only about the different standard of proof. Criminal innocence might turn on an element not relevant to a civil case.

[CJColucci]

Twenty-six comments so far and nobody has done some riff on "I know it when I see it," the line Justice Stewart is most famous for.

[Mr. Bumble]

Was somebody stopping you?