Narrative Opinion Summary
Justice Blackmun, joined by Justice Rehnquist, dissents regarding the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, expressing concern that it conflicts with the Supreme Court's earlier ruling in Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250 (1952). He emphasizes that Beauharnais has not been overruled or formally restricted. Consequently, Blackmun would grant a stay while the Court considers the applicants' petition for certiorari, which has already been filed, and until further instructions from the Court are issued.
Legal Issues Addressed
Conflict Between Circuit Court Decisions and Supreme Court Precedentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Justice Blackmun raises the issue that the Seventh Circuit's decision may be inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent set in Beauharnais v. Illinois.
Reasoning: Justice Blackmun, joined by Justice Rehnquist, dissents regarding the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, expressing concern that it conflicts with the Supreme Court's earlier ruling in Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250 (1952).
Granting of Stays Pending Certiorarisubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The dissent advocates for granting a stay while the Supreme Court considers the petition for certiorari and until further Court instructions.
Reasoning: Consequently, Blackmun would grant a stay while the Court considers the applicants' petition for certiorari, which has already been filed, and until further instructions from the Court are issued.
Precedential Authority of Supreme Court Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The opinion highlights that Beauharnais v. Illinois remains binding precedent because it has neither been overruled nor formally limited.
Reasoning: He emphasizes that Beauharnais has not been overruled or formally restricted.