Klein v. Martin · ¶29

“If this rule means anything,” we have said, it means that a federal court must “carefully consider all the reasons and evidence supporting the state court's decision.” Mays, 592 U. S., at 391. That requirement is pivotal because federal courts have “no authority to impose mandatory opinion- writing standards on state courts.” Johnson v. Williams, 568 U. S. 289, 300 (2013). And a state court “need not make detailed findings addressing all the evidence before it.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U. S. 322, 347 (2003). Indeed, AEDPA requires deference even if the state court does not discuss the evidence at all. Richter, 562 U. S., at 99. What matters under § 2254(d)(1)—the standard relevant here—is whether a decision is contrary to, or involves an unreasonable application of, this Court's holdings, not whether the state court's opinion satisfes the federal court's opinion- writing standards.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.