United States v. McPherson, a case about the interpretation of a statute of limitations provision, was released yesterday.
Editor's note: Judge Maggs's disquisition regarding the "absurdity doctrine" was interesting. However, if he believes that the test is whether “‘[a] rational Congress’ could have intended that meaning," then his reliance on that doctrine in Bergdahl is indefensible. Could a rational drafter have intended to apply the UCI provision to the President? Of course.
-Current Term Opinions
Joint R. App. Pro.
Global MJ Reform
LOC Mil. Law