Reflect, respond, react to latest SCOTUS Term by writing a commentary for the Federal Sentencing Reporter

Wearing my hat as an editor of the Federal Sentencing Reporter, I am happy to reproduce this solicitation from the journal below (while being eager to encourage readers to put together their views ASAP for possible publication):

Seeking Commentaries for Federal Sentencing Reporter Issue on “The October 2018 SCOTUS Term and the Criminal Justice Work of its Members”

In a September SCOTUSblog posting, Professor Rory Little called the criminal cases on the Supreme Court's docket for its October 2018 Term a "law professor’s dream."  He noted the Term included big constitutional cases addressing the Double Jeopardy Clause and the Excessive Fines Clause, as well as perennial hot topics involving application of the death penalty and the Armed Career Criminal Act.  With the Term now concluded, the Federal Sentencing Reporter (FSR) is eager to take stock through a call for papers for publication in a special October 2019 FSR issue.  And we are looking to publish thoughtful commentaries authored by practitioners and policy advocates as well as by law professors.

For this issue, FSR is open and interested in publishing pieces addressing an array of topics relating to the current Supreme Court's work on the criminal side of its docket.  Commentaries can focus on a single case (or even a single opinion in a single case) or they can address a series of cases or a developing jurisprudence.  Contributors are also welcome to discuss the voting patterns and rulings of a particular Justice or of the Court as a whole.  How the Court selects criminal cases for review or what topics should garner the Justices' attention in the years ahead are also fitting topics.  In short, any engaging discussion of the work of the current Court on criminal justice matters will fit the bill.

FSR pieces are shorter and more lightly footnoted than traditional law review pieces; ideally, drafts are between 2000 and 5000 words with less than 50 footnotes.  Drafts need to be received on or before August 1 to ensure a timely publication, and should be sent to co-managing editors Douglas Berman (berman.43 @ osu.edu) and Steven Chanenson (chanenson @ law.villanova.edu) for consideration.

Here are just a sampling of SCOTUS posts from this blog on the Term's big cases to inspire contributions:

• SCOTUS, ruling 5-4, finds part of 924(c) unconstitutionally vague in Davis
• Accounting Justice Gorsuch's votes (and opinions) so far this SCOTUS Term in big criminal cases 
• SCOTUS, via splintered 5-4 ruling, decides that supervised release revocation procedures used in Haymond are unconstitutional 
• Ruling 5-4, SCOTUS upholds constitutionality of blood test of unconscious driver 
• SCOTUS finds mens rea of "knowing" distributes in gun statute in Rehaif
• SCOTUS plurality says SORNA delegation of statute's reach to Attorney General "easily passes constitutional muster"
• Gundy, Rehaif and Davis, oh my: object lessons in results-oriented jurisprudence
• Just how huge is the mess and challenge for lower federal courts after SCOTUS decisions in Davis, Haymond and Rehaif? 
• SCOTUS finds Batson violation based on "extraordinary facts" in Flowers
• SCOTUS, ruling 6-3, refuses to let appeal waivers impact ineffectiveness claims when attorney improperly fails to appeal
• Via lengthy opinions, SCOTUS preserves "dual sovereignty" doctrine in Gamble 
• Fourteen+ years after inventing reasonableness review in Booker, SCOTUS finally grants cert to address how it works procedurally 
• Splitting 5-4 along traditional ideological lines, SCOTUS rejects Missouri inmate's challenge to lethal injection protocol
• SCOTUS stays Texas execution because condemned was denied Buddhist spiritual advisor in execution chamber
• SCOTUS, ruling 5-3, clarifies execution competency standards and remands in Madison v. Alabama |

Via RSSMix.com Mix ID 8247011 http://www.rssmix.com/