Justice Douglass wrote a very compelling dissent in the Draper v. US case that the information provided by the informant and corroborated by law enforcement did not amount to probable cause.
Explain the essence (meaning) of his dissent?
Do you agree with his opinion?
Why or why not?
What was most compelling about his argument?
What was most compelling about reasoning of the majority opinion?
Did either side miss something that you believe they should have focused on?