Reposted by Stephen Malloy
Justice Alito devotes an entire chapter of his new book to the emergency docket—and to responding to people like me (“the most prolific academic critic of the emergency docket”).
As I explain over at “One First,” it … didn’t go well:
www.stevevladeck.com/p/256-so-une...
![An archived copy of Michael Tracey's original Substack post includes a screenshot from "eCourt Records" and the commentary: "It's [name redacted]. Don't blame me -- the New York Court System just posted it. Seemingly inadvertently. Oh well."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6arqeda2f5piwu7zien3b2hq/bafkreiftgxhhfprcae33jlwnll3ycf3r4cwwqxkx4tryc7b2kvdsuzaeca)
![interest in [her] own life." Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U. S. 1,
9 (1985).
In capital cases, "[a]ppreciation of our own fallibility, and respect for the judgment of an appellate tribunal," demand caution before "acting irretrievably." Bowersox v. Williams,
517 U. S. 345, 347 (1996) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting). Indeed, this Court often states that it is "'a court of review, not of first view?" McLane Co. v. EEOC, 581 U.S. 72, 85 (2017) (quoting Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709, 718, n. 7
(2005)). Today, the Court, as it has too often lately, chooses to overlook that principle precisely when it matters most.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreic2pj24tnxhjgzvpr7n777r27ac5liklla2vxxbiypqvjaouxvh4q)
