Cullen v. Pinholster - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

On April 4, 2011, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Cullen v. Pinholster. The questions in this case were the following: 1) Under federal habeas corpus law, is review of a state court decision limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits? 2) Did the state court unreasonably apply clearly established federal law?

In an opinion delivered by Justice Thomas, the Court held that 1) under federal habeas corpus law, "review is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits" and 2) the state court did not unreasonably apply clearly established federal law. Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia Kennedy joined Justice Thomas' opinion in full. Justice Alito joined all of Justice Thomas' opinion, except for Part II. Also, Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Breyer joined Parts I and II of Justice Thomas' opinion. In addition, Justice Breyer filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justices Ginsburg and Kagan joined Part II of Justice Thomas' opinion. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion that Justices Ginsburg and Kagan joined as to Part II.

To discuss the case, we have Ronald Eisenberg, who is the Deputy District Attorney for the Law Division of the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office.

[Return to the SCOTUScast menu]