Dixon v. Duffy
Supreme Court of the United States
1DissentJustice Jackson
Both the wisdom and the legality of this policy toward the highest court of a state appear dubious to me. What we are doing, in essence, is to vacate a state court judg*147ment, not because it is found to be inconsistent with federal law, but because the state court has not told us, with an acceptable degree of formality, what reasons led to rendering it.
This Court has blazed the way for the practice of dispensing with opinions in denying petitions for discretionary orders, such as certiorari and motions for leave to file petitions for habeas corpus. Unless we mean to impose on state courts a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Herb v. PitcairnSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Minnesota v. National Tea Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- State Tax Commission v. Van CottSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Herb v. PitcairnSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- National Tea Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.