Supreme Court of the United States
Bartlett v. Strickland
This writing
- Type
- Dissent
- Filed
- March 9, 2009
- Case
- Bartlett v. Strickland
- Case status
- Decided
Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.
Opening text
The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.
Justice Breyer, dissenting. I join Justice Souter’s opinion in full. I write separately in light of the plurality’s claim that a bright-line 50% rule (used as a Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U. S. 30 (1986), gateway) serves administrative objectives. In the plurality’s view, that rule amounts to a relatively simple administrative device that will help separate at the outset those cases that are mo…
Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.
Other writings in this case
| Type | Author | Filed |
|---|---|---|
| Opinion of the Court | Not attributed | March 9, 2009 |
| Opinion | Not attributed | March 9, 2009 |