I expect there will be some buzz about Scalia’s comment in oral argument today that:
"No one thinks your client is abstaining from tequila for fear of being deported," he said. Supervision "is impossible once he leaves the country," he added. "This is an ingenious exercise of the conceivable." (See page 16, line 15 of the transcript, here)
My first prediction is that the blogosphere will discuss (and, of course, take different positions on whether) that is some form of prejudice shown by Scalia.
More interesting, perhaps, is the case itself, where the question presented is: Has the Fifth Circuit erred in holding – in opposition to the Second, Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits – that a state felony conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance is a "drug trafficking crime" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2) and hence an "aggravated felony," under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a) (43) (B), even though the same crime is a misdemeanor under federal law?
My second prediction is that the Tequila remark will get more coverage than the substance of the case. We’ll see…