Media coverage of the Supreme Court’s recognition that pretrial restraints of untainted assets are unconstitutional when such restraints prevent defendants from exercising their Sixth Amendment rights to assistance of counsel, Luis v. United States, No. 14-419 (March 30, 2016):
Damon Root explains Luis for Reason.
Amy Howe summarizes the four Luis opinions at Scotusblog.
Adam Liptak does the same for the New York Times.
Prof. Jonathan Adler notes the unusual voting coalitions at the Volokh Conspiracy.
At Thinkprogress.org, Ian Millhiser interprets Justice Kagan’s dissent as soliciting an invitation to overrule United States v. Monsanto, 491 U.S. 600 (1989) (Government may freeze a defendant's tainted assets pretrial, on mere probable cause showing, without violating the Sixth Amendment).
Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern agrees with the concurrence from Justice Thomas.
Prof. Noah Feldman’s frames Luis as the Court standing up for the rights of rich criminal defendants.
The Atlantic’s Matt Ford reframes Luis into a discussion of the nation’s public defense system.
For AFR’s part, we are elated by Luis. Our next step will be defending its breadth in the courts.