Dorsey v. United States: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 35:

===Scalia's dissent===

Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], joined by Chief Justice [[John G. Roberts]] and Justices [[Clarence Thomas]] and [[Samuel Alito]], dissented from the decision of the Court, arguing that the new more lenient minimums don't apply to pre-2010 offenders.<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Dorsey v. United States |vol=132 |reporter=S. Ct. |opinion=2321 |pinpoint=2339 |court=S. Ct. |date=2012 |url=http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15864169166343013176&q=dorsey+v.+united+states&hl=en&as_sdt=2,11&as_vis=1 |accessdate=28 December 2012}}</ref> Scalia saw the silence of the Act on retroactivity as a reason that the Court should not apply it themselves.<ref name=SCOTUSBLOG/> "The canon of constitutional avoidance [has] no application here," Scalia argued, "[for] although many observers viewed the 100-to-1 crack-to-powder rationratio under the prior law as having a racially disparate impact, only ''intentional'' discrimination may violate the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause."<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Dorsey v. United States |vol=132 |reporter=S. Ct. |opinion=2321 |pinpoint=2344 |court=S. Ct. |date=2012 |url=http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15864169166343013176&q=dorsey+v.+united+states&hl=en&as_sdt=2,11&as_vis=1 |accessdate=28 December 2012}}</ref>

==References==