I always wanted to be a footnote.

I'm not sure what this says about the standards at the Harvard Law Review, but this blog was cited (with approval, I think) in the latest issue of that esteemed journal. (See 120 Harvard L. Rev. 1707, 1710 fn 30 [April 2007], available here.) The article summarizes the Second Circuit's recent decision in US v Feliz (467 F3d 227 [2d Cir. 2006]), and references my post discussing whether autopsy reports qualify as "testimonial" under Crawford v Washington (541 US 36). It is nice to know that, long after this blog has evaporated into the digital ether, some trace of the endeavor will be left, collecting dust on a law library shelf.