|
| Concurrence | width=25px | | Other |- | width=25px | | Dissent | width=25px | | Concurrence/dissent | white-space: nowrap |Total = | 25 |- | colspan=2 | Bench opinions = 24 | colspan=2 | Opinions relating to orders = 1 | colspan=2 | In-chambers opinions = 0 |- | white-space: nowrap colspan=2 valign=top | Unanimous decisions: 1 | colspan=2 valign=top | Most joined by: Thomas (17) | colspan=2 valign=top | Least joined by: Breyer (5) |} |} |} | valign=top |Death penalty | width=20% valign=top |Thomas |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top |Scalia joined the majority, and filed a short concurrence to state that he continued to believe that limits on a jury's consideration of mitigating evidence in capital sentencing did not violate the Eighth Amendment. However, because Kennedy's majority opinion conformed to Court precedent, he was content to join that opinion in full. |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top |Rights of the accused | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top |Scalia was the sole dissenter from Stevens' 8-1 opinion, which held that an indictment for criminal attempt to illegally enter the United States did not need to expressly state the alleged overt act committed in furtherance of the attempted crime. |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top |Article III standing; patent; declaratory judgments | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top |Thomas filed a dissent. |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top |Standing; Clean Air Act | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Thomas, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top |Rights of the accused | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top |Scalia filed a statement respecting the Court's denial of ''certiorari'', commenting on the reliance by the Solicitor General's supplemental brief on ''United States v. Resendiz-Ponce'', 549 U.S. 102 (2007) to argue that the omission of a necessary element from an indictment of fraud was not constitutionally deficient. Scalia stated that he did not support denial on that basis, but that ''Resendiz-Ponce'' could apply "depending upon how the crime of fraud fares in our new some-crimes-are-self-defining jurisprudence. Another frontier of law opened by this Court, full of opportunity and adventure for lawyers and judges." |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Thomas; Souter (in part) |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Stevens, Ginsburg |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas; Alito (in part) |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas; Alito (in part) |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Unanimous |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito; Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer (in part) |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg; Roberts, Breyer, Alito (in part) |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Roberts, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Thomas |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top |Kennedy, Thomas |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |- | align=right valign=top | | valign=top | | width=20% valign=top | |- | bgcolor=#EEEEEE colspan=3 valign=top | |} ==References== *. *. *. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「2006 term United States Supreme Court opinions of Antonin Scalia」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|