Enough about the merits of Danco. Let’s talk about the formatting.
Typically, when a judicial opinion includes one footnote, it is marked with an asterisk (*). When there are two or more footnotes, they are numbered sequentially. However, Justice Samuel Alito’s solo dissent in Danco breaks this convention. It contains two footnotes, yet neither is numbered. Instead, the first footnote is marked with an asterisk (*), and the second with a dagger (†).
Why the deviation from standard formatting? In a solo dissent, there is no majority opinion to respond to, so Justice Alito would not need to address arguments raised by other justices. The unusual choice—using a dagger (†) for the second footnote—suggests a deliberate stylistic decision rather than a procedural necessity. The reasoning behind this formatting remains unclear.
If you have insights or explanations, the author invites readers to share their thoughts via email.
Related articles
How Recent Supreme Court Rulings Reshape Constitutional Law Education and Practice
Randy Barnett and I are nearing completion of the Fifth Edition of our Constitutional Law casebook. We are still waiting for the last batch of cases f...
Supreme Court Blocks Restrictions on Abortion Pill Access via Mail and Telehealth
In a fast-moving case that threatened to decimate access to abortion pills nationwide, the Supreme Court has hit pause on a federal appeals court’s at...
New Study Challenges Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment Curtilage Rulings: Public Perceptions vs. Legal Doctrine
I'm very happy to post a draft of a new article, "Popular Conceptions of Fourth Amendment Curtilage," written together with my co-author Matthew Kugle...
The Roberts Court’s Antipreemption Shift: How the Supreme Court is Rejecting Corporate-Friendly Preemption Claims
The Roberts Court is often derided as a pro-corporation Court. I've lost count of how many stories measure the Chamber of Commerce's success rate befo...
Michigan Court Grants Police Qualified Immunity After Detainee Dies in Jail Following Overdose
Imagine you're a sheriff's deputy and a detainee arrives, unresponsive and moving slowly after ingesting a large quantity of unknown pills. After a do...
Democrats Urged to Adopt Proportional Representation to Fix U.S. Democracy by 2029
You can watch this episode of Right Now With Perry Bacon above or by following this show on YouTube or Substack.The unfairness created by Republican g...
Why Some Advocates Want Congress to Limit Supreme Court Power with a Supermajority Rule
In 1893, a Harvard law professor named James Bradley Thayer published one of the most influential articles in U.S. legal history. "The Origin and Scop...
May 14, 1973: Supreme Court Rules on Frontiero v. Richardson Gender Discrimination Case
5/14/1973: Frontiero v. Richardson decided. The post Today in Supreme Court History: May 14, 1973 appeared first on Reason.com.