Regular readers will know that Bench Memos often serves as an early-warning system calling attention to opinions that the Supreme Court should overturn. So it was that nearly a year ago I called attention to Fourth Circuit judge J. Harvie Wilkinson’s opinion (on en banc consideration) slamming the panel decision in United States v. Gary. Wilkinson’s opinion began:

I concur in the denial of rehearing en banc for one reason and one reason only. The panel’s holding is so incorrect and on an issue of such importance that I think the Supreme Court should consider it promptly. Any en banc proceedings would only be a detour. Many, many cases await the resolution of this question.
This court’s decision is far-reaching in its implications. It not only creates a circuit split of yawning proportions, but also an equally profound schism with the Supreme Court’s whole approach to error review and remediation. Is it eight—or nine—circuits that disagree with us? I have lost count, but the ranks are growing.

Today, in its consolidated decision styled Greer v. U.S., the Supreme Court, vindicating Judge Wilkinson, unanimously rejected the Fourth Circuit decision. More precisely, an eight-Justice majority, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh, reversed the Fourth Circuit’s judgment, and Justice Sotomayor agreed that the Fourth Circuit erred but would have remanded for consideration of an issue that she believed open.

I will leave it to the interested reader to explore the details of the Court’s holding on review of a Rehaif error.