It is only that the opening of the dissent is written in the style of a Mickey Spillane novel. As for the legal aspect: A majority of Court declined to hear a case. The Chief Justice - and Associate Justice Kennedy - disagreed with that, and Roberts wrote the dissent explaining why. Ordinarily, the refusal to hear a case is more routine. They vote not to hear it, and it isn't heard. How this compares with the English court system I have no idea, because I don't know anything about the English court system. In particular I don't know how judgments are appealed.
I can't understand the link or the Washington Post article. Maybe its a US-UK thing. I'm confused.
ReplyDeleteIt is only that the opening of the dissent is written in the style of a Mickey Spillane novel. As for the legal aspect: A majority of Court declined to hear a case. The Chief Justice - and Associate Justice Kennedy - disagreed with that, and Roberts wrote the dissent explaining why. Ordinarily, the refusal to hear a case is more routine. They vote not to hear it, and it isn't heard. How this compares with the English court system I have no idea, because I don't know anything about the English court system. In particular I don't know how judgments are appealed.
ReplyDelete