Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-826_p702.pdf
Page Number: 37.0

8 

BROWN v. DAVENPORT 

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

amateur historian, it is past time to put in some work on
the  technical  issue  before  us:  what  standard(s)  a  habeas
court should use to decide whether a state trial court’s con-
stitutional error was harmless. 

II 
Except that little work is in truth necessary—because we
have  already,  and  unanimously,  resolved  that  question
twice before. 

To see how (and why) we have done so, first consider the
two possible answers.  As the majority frames it, the choice
is  between  (1) applying  the  Brecht  standard  alone  (as  Er-
vine  Davenport  wants)  and  (2) applying  both  Brecht  and 
AEDPA (as the State desires).  See ante, at 1, 14.  (Trust 
me: I will in a moment set out what those standards are.) 
That formulation of the choice is appropriate as shorthand;
indeed, I will use it myself.  But it remains an oversimplifi-
cation.  For in arguing that the Brecht test suffices, Daven-
port  does  not  contend  that  a  federal  habeas  court  may 
simply  ignore  AEDPA.    Although  the  majority  veils  the 
point,  Davenport  readily  acknowledges  that  a  court  must
always comply with AEDPA’s limitation on “the legal ma-
terials a court may consult” and “draw on” to justify habeas 
relief.  Ante, at 15–16; see Brief for Respondent 16–17 (ex-
plaining that a court’s Brecht analysis is sufficient only if it 
relies  exclusively  “on  the  legal  and  factual  materials  al-
lowed” under AEDPA).  All Davenport claims is that if the 
habeas court confines itself to using AEDPA-approved ma-
terials,  then  it  need  only  find  the  Brecht  standard  met  to 
grant relief.4  That means (here, finally, is the Brecht stand-

—————— 

4 That view does not, as the majority recurrently claims, require “re-
writ[ing]” Brecht to make it “Brecht 2.0.”  Ante, at 19, n. 4; see ante, at 
17, n. 3, 20, n. 5.  The question of what materials a court may consider is 
of  course  different  from  the  question  of  what  standard  the  court  must 
apply  in  deciding  to  grant  habeas  relief.  Brecht  addresses  the  legal