Heller v. District of Columbia, 670 F.3d 1244 (D.C. Cir. 2011) Dissent: “As I read the relevant Supreme Court precedents, the D.C. ban on semi-automatic rifles and the D.C. gun registration requirement are unconstitutional and may not be enforced.”
Good start.
“• Garza v. Hargan, 874 F.3d 735 (per curiam) (D.C. Cir. 2017) (“Today’s majority decision . . . is ultimately based on a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. Government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand, thereby barring any Government efforts to expeditiously transfer the minors to their immigration sponsors before they make that momentous life decision.”). [He was joined by Judges Henderson and Griffith.]”
bump
Excellent list. I’ve been looking for something similar to this. Lots of reading material there. I agree with the author that dissents and concurrences are the best way to look in to the reasoning of the judge. Opinions are products of consensus, dissents and concurrence are normally not so much.