Re: ps
There isn't a good place for this question in the thread, so I'll just tack it on the end.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only part of a S.C. decision that holds the force of law is the decision itself. Concurrences do not hold the force of law unless they are cited in the decision proper, or are joined in the concurrence by the writer of the decision. Neither of which is the case here - no-one on the court joined in the concurrence.
Cannon is banking on weak sauce.
There isn't a good place for this question in the thread, so I'll just tack it on the end.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only part of a S.C. decision that holds the force of law is the decision itself. Concurrences do not hold the force of law unless they are cited in the decision proper, or are joined in the concurrence by the writer of the decision. Neither of which is the case here - no-one on the court joined in the concurrence.
Cannon is banking on weak sauce.
