Justices Alito and Gorsuch Signal Interest in Revisiting Crawford Decision
The Supreme Court declined to hear Franklin v. New York, but two justices raised concerns about the clarity and historical grounding of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence.
- The Supreme Court declined to hear Franklin v. New York, leaving the lower court's decision in place.
- Justice Alito criticized the 2004 Crawford v. Washington decision for failing to provide consistent and predictable outcomes in Confrontation Clause cases.
- Justice Gorsuch questioned the 'primary-purpose' test used in such cases, arguing it lacks grounding in the Sixth Amendment's text and original meaning.
- Both justices suggested that the Confrontation Clause framework may need to be reconsidered in a future case to address its instability and historical accuracy.
- Alito and Gorsuch emphasized the importance of insights from lower courts and careful judicial deliberation before revisiting the precedent.
Reason.com 
