Quote of the day is from a Sully reader, making an observation on Walker's opinion:
What strikes me about Judge Walker's opinion is the amount of evidence he included there - numbered, paraphrased facts with direct citation to and quotation from the trial record. As a lawyer, I can't say that I have ever seen a judge include that much of the trial transcript in an opinion. He would have done this to make his record so that when the case is appealed - as everyone knows it will be - he has included enough direct evidence produced at trial to support his application of the law. His clerks made that trial record their bitch, and Judge Walker took that dog for a walk.Those not caring to peruse the 138 (or 136)-page opinion may wish to look at the "key language" flagged by Orin Kerr; those who wish to sample wingnut wrath, may wish to look at the comments to Kerr's post.
... Bryan Garner, Dict. of Modern Legal Usage: "stricken, though common as a past participle in much legal writing, is considered by the better authorities to be inferior to struck." Hmmm.