dicta

Anyway, repeating this link to “The Second Amendment and Domestic Violence”, which, in comments, cites numerous Circuit Courts asserting the rule that SCOTUS dicta is treated as binding precedent.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

Any circuit court that says dicta is binding rather than persuasive is confused, it seems to me.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

Hamblen argued that the Heller Court, in dicta, got Miller wrong; and that if the law of Miller is correctly applied to his case, then his conviction cannot stand.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

But the distinction between alternate holdings and dicta is a fine one.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

– For the record, dicta is still considered non-binding.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

I imagine the statement you read about Supreme Court dicta being binding was tongue-in-cheek, talking more about how courts tend to behave with respect to certain dicta, rather than how they formally are required to behave.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

If the Supreme Court has addressed the issue in dicta, they might find that persuasive.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

The court then stated in dicta that the regulation would also pass under Heller.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

To be fair, Courts have also taken the opposite position when it suits the outcome — that dicta is NOT binding.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010

But the distinction between alternate holdings and dicta is a fine one.

The Volokh Conspiracy » Diane Wood on the Second Amendment 2010