Gorsuch, joined by Sotomayor(!), writes that SCOTUS should've taken a Confrontation Clause case

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Last edited Mon Nov 19, 2018, 12:24 PM - Edit history (1)

WhatCouldGoWrongHat Retweeted

Gorsuch, joined by Sotomayor(!), writes that SCOTUS should’ve taken a Confrontation Clause case and affirmed defendants’ right to cross-examine forensic analysts at trial. (I think he’s absolutely correct.) https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/111918zor_q86b.pdf …

Link to tweet

Scalia was the court’s Confrontation Clause champion, and it appears Gorsuch is eager to continue his legacy. Good for him.

Link to tweet

SCOTUSblog Retweeted

#SCOTUS denies review in Stuart v Alabama, involving introduction of blood-alcohol testing w/out testimony from analyst who performed test. Gorsuch dissented from denial, joined by Sotomayor.

Link to tweet

The running tally is:

DUers, opposed to cross-examination (Betsy DeVos wants to let accused sex abusers cross examine their victims);

Gorsuch, in favor of cross-examination.