Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/598us1r3_j4ek.pdf
Page Number: 23.0

38 

CRUZ v. ARIZONA 

Barrett, J., dissenting 

And  we  have  cautioned  before  that  “[f]ederal  habeas  courts 
must  not  lightly  `disregard  state  procedural  rules  that  are 
substantially  similar  to  those  to  which  we  give  full  force  in 
our  own courts.' ”  Johnson  v.  Lee, 578  U. S.  605, 609  (2016) 
(per curiam) (quoting Kindler, 558 U. S., at 62). 

The  Court  makes  a  case  for  why  the  Arizona  Supreme 
Court's  interpretation  of  its  own  precedent  is  wrong.  If  I 
were  on  the  Arizona  Supreme  Court,  I  might  agree.  But 
that call is not within our bailiwick.  Our job is to determine 
whether the Arizona Supreme Court's decision is defensible, 
and we owe the utmost deference to the state court in mak-
ing that judgment.  Cases of inadequacy are extremely rare, 
and this is not one.  I respectfully dissent. 

Page Proof Pending Publication