OK, I just read it.
This is HUGE!!!
I first read NY v US about 1997 and realized then that it by itself was almost enough to turn the entire governmental structure on it’s head. It is probably the most important SC case in the last hundred years.
This case recognizes a couple things:
That the Tenth amendment still exists and is in effect
That ultimately, the law is about human beings. It may effect corporations, but natural men and women have a stake. For a while lately, there has been a direction of the Court to recognize corporate fictions like States and corporations and classes but not see so much individual humans. This is a clear reversal of that trend.
That incarceration under a federal statute that is invalid or otherwise defective amounts to what can be called “an injury in fact”. This is common law talking here, folks.
Wow. I’m gonna have to read it again and check the citations...
On the surface at least, it certainly appears so. Fact is, if I read it correctly, I can't find any other way to look at it. What's next, standing for an individual against the federales' overreach re 2nd Amendment guarantees? 1st Amendment??? Patiently awaiting on Constitutional "scholars" to weigh in. Oh hey, Jug Ears is a Constitutional scholar. We could check with him...
For the legally-challenged such as myself, what is the importance of common law here?