http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-150.pdfDecision released yesterday.
I agree with the Scalia dissent - and it is probably one of his most vicious (which is quite amazing really). Ginsberg's dissent says basically the same thing, in a nicer way. Thomas' view is reasonable, but I don't think it is correct here.
As I expected, Sotomayor is evil when it comes to protecting the rights of criminal defendants from having statements be used against them without scrutiny. This decision will drive a large hole (if not completely destroy) into the Confrontation Clause redevelopment that started under Scalia's decision in that case, as it's pretty clear that she lies not with her precedessor Souter on this issue.
Bullhoming v. New Mexico is a different Confrontation Clause also on the docket this term - puts that case in a new light.
Poll
