W] e routinely afford substantial, if not controlling deference to dicta from the Supreme Court. Respect for the rule of law demands nothing less: lower courts grappling with complex legal questions... must give due weight to guidance from the Supreme Court, so as to ensure the consistent and uniform development and application of the law. "(internal citation omitted

The Fourth Circuit concluded this scheme might violate the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments clause because it targeted "conduct that is both compelled by [the plaintiffs'] illness and is otherwise lawful for all those of legal drinking age."

"The void for vagueness doctrine is rooted in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments."

Although I do not necessarily agree with the Fourth Circuit's conclusion that Justice White's concurrence "offers the narrowest basis for the Court's fractured decision, and so is controlling under the Marks rule,"

"To survive a vagueness challenge, a statute must give a person of ordinary intelligence adequate notice of what conduct is prohibited and must include sufficient standards to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement."

"If a statute fails to provide any standard of conduct by which persons can determine whether they are violating the statute or does not provide minimal guidelines to govern law enforcement, the statute is unconstitutionally vague."

This Court "cannot simply override a legal pronouncement endorsed by a majority of the Supreme Court, particularly when the supposed dicta is recent and not enfeebled by later statements."

—noting that a "relatively strict test" for vagueness is warranted "if the law is `quasi-criminal'and has a stigmatizing effect

Although Defendant did not raise the risk to his family before the district court, the Government did not make a waiver argument, and we could excuse that defect.

Id. "The purpose of the fair notice requirement is to enable citizens to conform their conduct to the proscriptions of the law."