Talk:Gilbert v. California

Who joined what part of this opinion?

Obviously, this is a fractured decision, and different justices joined different portions of the majority opinion. However, there seem to be contradictions between the statements in the U.S. Reports as to what portions they joined and the actual opinions expressed in the case.

Namely:

1. There is a sentence at the end of the opinion stating "The Chief Justice joins this opinion except for Part III, from which he dissents for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Mr. Justice Douglas.

However, later on, it is noted that Chief Justice Warren also joined the opinion of Justice Fortas, which dissented from Part I of the majority decision (the part which rejected the petitioner's challenge to the handwriting exemplar). Therefore, Warren necessarily also did not join Part I.

2. Justice Douglas states in his opinion: "...I agree with the Court's opinion except for Part I", and notes his agreement with Justices Black's and Fortas' dissents on this point. At the same time, Douglas' opinion is directed towards deciding the issue in Part III of the majority decision (which was dismissed there as improvidently granted). That means he also necessarily does not agree with Part III of the majority opinion, and does not join it.

I edited the infobox to reflect what I understand to be the justices' actual stated positions, as opposed to those ascribed to them by the Reporter of Decisions.

Does anyone object to my interpretation of the case, or to my edit? LunaticLarry (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)