Connecticut v. Doehr/Concurrence Scalia

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Concurring Opinion
Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg Wikipedia article

Justice SCALIA, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

Since the manner of attachment here was not a recognized procedure at common law, cf. Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. ----, ----, 111 S.Ct. 1032, ----, 113 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991) (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment), I agree that its validity under the Due Process Clause should be determined by applying the test we set forth in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 96 S.Ct. 893, 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976); and I agree that it fails that test. I join Parts I and III of the Court's opinion, and concur in the judgment of the Court.


This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).