While the general impression of the US Supreme Court is that it's not friendly to complaints brought by people convicted of violent crimes, it's also clearly not friendly to appeals courts that appear to repeatedly violate its holdings. Adam Liptak and Ralph Blumental discuss Miller-El, round two, in today's New York Times. It appears that in this case the primary concern of the Supremes is bringing into line what it sees as state (the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals) and federal (the Fifth Circuit) appeals courts that are refusing to follow its dictates. If the Rehnquist Court is known for anything, it's known for trying to protect and expand its own power. That said, if the legal system is going to work as designed, it would seem appropriate to end some of the more reactionary tendencies of the Fifth Circuit that are discussed in the article.
Posted by armand at December 5, 2004 02:03 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Law and the Courts