Two takes on the Supreme Court’s statutory interpretation work in Hewitt

In this post last month, I flagged two essays from the Sentencing Matters Substack discussing the Supreme Court’s work this past Term in Esteras v. United States addressing federal supervised release decision-making.  I am pleased now to continue to highlight additional SCOTUS commentary from the Sentencing Matters Substack, this time about Hewitt v. United States and including one essay I just published:

From Jonathan Wroblewski at the Sentencing Matters Substack, “Hewitt v. United States: The Linguistics and Analysis Are Dubious. The Result Is Right.“

From Douglas Berman at the Sentencing Matters Substack, “Extreme and purposeless punishment subject to wordsmithing rather than serious constitutional scrutiny in Hewitt.“

Speaking on behalf of the whole  Sentencing Matters Substack team, we would welcome “guest submissions” of essays discussion recent Supreme Court (or even lower court) sentencing work.  In addition, the next SCOTUS Term, OT 26, is already shaping up to have lots of notable sentencing issues. I expect to be writing a few more essays about the briefing and oral arguments in these cases in the coming months, and essays from others on these topics would also be greatly encouraged.