Our July guest blogger with be rising 3L Joel Gracyk. Joel hails from Chaska, Minnesota, and is interested in constitutional law and legal writing. He is the incoming Editor in Chief of the Marquette Law Review.
And a belated thank-you for the excellent series of posts from our previous guests, Ric Gass ’70 and 2L Danielle Nardick!
(This is another post in our series, Looking Back at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 Term.)
In my previous post, I noted a number of the considerations that the Supreme Court emphasized in its criminal statutory interpretation cases from the past term. In this post, I will highlight one recurring point of controversy, that is, whether the Court should try to maximize the effectiveness of statutes in achieving their overarching purposes.
Abramski, the firearms purchase case, provides a good illustration.
(This is another post in our series, Looking Back at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 Term.)
In the first post in this series, I discussed two causation cases in some detail. In this post, I will more briefly summarize the full set of the Court’s criminal statutory interpretation cases from the past term and then offer a few overarching observations.
Here are the cases (excluding habeas corpus decisions):