Should Justice Thomas have put the story of Warrick Dunn in his opinion?
Yes, because it's relevant to the question of what should happen to Brumfeld.
Yes, because it's good to include even irrelevant material about the impact of a crime on victims.
No, a judge does best when he strictly limits his opinion to what is relevant to the legal analysis and this is not.
No, because it's confusing to imply that the success of the victim's family has a bearing on anything and insensitive to survivors who fare badly.
It's up to Thomas. He should express himself in a way that seems fit to him.
See this poll on:
Created at Crowdsignal.com