tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7420543479422278886.post1291210370912473746..comments2023-09-30T06:44:56.203-07:00Comments on The Narrowest Grounds: Montgomery v. Louisiana - A Comment on the Jurisdictional QuestionAsher Steinberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13081594205660019619noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7420543479422278886.post-80066885465865322952015-10-29T13:47:43.322-07:002015-10-29T13:47:43.322-07:00Hello, I'm late to commenting. Congrats on yo...Hello, I'm late to commenting. Congrats on your blog. I actually bought the argument they were making for jurisdiction when I first read it. However, your post (combined with the argument that the states using the federal rules of evidence as a model could invite Supreme Court review) convinced me otherwise. Rather than decide whether Teague is Constitutionally mandated, my preference is for them to DIG the case since there's apparently a Federal case in the pipeline they can use instead.Erik Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08534864370388285565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7420543479422278886.post-90384968129884216302015-10-14T09:40:55.812-07:002015-10-14T09:40:55.812-07:00Thanks. That's a subscription-only link to yo...Thanks. That's a subscription-only link to your (very good) article; here's one that isn't subscription-only.<br /><br />http://sentencing.typepad.com/files/njlj-state-retroactivity-article.pdfAsher Steinberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13081594205660019619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7420543479422278886.post-58200507194942505142015-10-14T09:34:42.617-07:002015-10-14T09:34:42.617-07:00Glad to see someone echoing the arguments I made i...Glad to see someone echoing the arguments I made in the article linked to in this SCOTUSBlog post (in the "Briefly" section about Toca v. Louisiana, the predecessor to Montgomery:<br /><br />http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/02/wednesday-round-up-260/Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13434065318440647917noreply@blogger.com