It turns out that the “kangaroo court” not only didn’t have kangaroos, but it wasn’t even a court: Back on December 27, 2006, I had a post titled “Imagine that — appellate judges don’t take kindly to trial judge’s characterization of appellate court as ‘kangaroo court’” about a ruling that California’s Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District had issued that day.

One day later, I noted here a report from law.com in which the trial judge explained that his “kangaroo court” remark was not directed at any appellate court whatsoever.

The Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District finally received that message too, and from none other than the chief kangaroo himself, James P. Willett, the District Attorney of San Joaquin County. You can access at this link that appellate court’s ruling on rehearing, issued today.

Second Circuit affirms preliminary injunction preventing New York City from enforcing ban prohibiting people between the ages of 18 and 21 from purchasing or possessing aerosol spray paint containers and broad tipped indelible markers: What would New York City be without graffiti? Apparently we aren’t about to find out the answer to that question. You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

“Appeals Court Hears Al-Marri’s Request for Access”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered.”

“The Third Man: The 4th Circuit does one more round on enemy combatants.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Native Americans on trial often go without counsel”: This article (free access) appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

Available online from SSRN: Rebecca E. Zietlow has an article titled “The Judicial Restraint of the Warren Court (and Why it Matters)” (abstract with link for download).

And Youngjae Lee has an article titled “International Consensus as Persuasive Authority in the Eighth Amendment” (abstract with links for download).

Thanks to “Legal Theory Blog” for the pointers (here and here).

“PBS: ‘The Supreme Court’; Series Looks Behind the Scenes and History of Nation’s Highest Court.” washingtonpost.com today hosted an online chat with Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen. You can access the chat transcript by clicking here.

“Tax Court Issues Opinion in Ballard – Kanter – Lisle”: “TaxProf Blog” provides this post today, noting that “In issuing the opinion today, the Tax Court complied (barely) with the Eleventh Circuit’s extraordinary July 20, 2006 order directing that the Tax Court give the case ‘high priority’ and dispose of it by February 1, 2007.”

You can access today’s 457-page ruling at this link.

“Supreme Court Justice addresses McKenna college”: The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin of California today contains an article that begins, “In an address at Claremont McKenna Wednesday night, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia explained at length his ‘originalist’ view of the Constitution, disputing the concept that the Constitution is a ‘living document’ subject to change in interpretation as time passes.”

More details on Justice Antonin Scalia’s visit to Claremont McKenna College can be accessed in a news release headlined “Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia To Discuss Constitutional Interpretation.”

“Reporter’s View of Libby Case Testimony”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

“Arkansas’s fieriest judge speaks out. Again. ‘Judges have as much right to be involved with issues as anybody else.'” Arkansas Times today has posted online an article that begins, “Though he’s become known as a spirited defender of free speech, Judge Wendell Griffen says ‘I didn’t set out to be a First Amendment champion. But I certainly don’t mind it. My particular interest is in open government. I want to demystify the way the judicial system works. Too few people understand it.’ A black member of the Arkansas Court of Appeals, one step down from the Arkansas Supreme Court, Griffen is once again entangled with the state agency that disciplines errant judges, charged with judicial misconduct because of things he’s said.”

“John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States, to judge Moot Court competition”: Washington University in St. Louis has today issued a news release that begins, “John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States, will head the prestigious panel of judges presiding over the finals of the School of Law’s Wiley Rutledge Moot Court Competition on February 6 in the Bryan Cave Moot Courtroom of Anheuser-Busch Hall.”

“Chief Justice John Roberts Speaking at Northwestern”: Jim Lindgren live blogs the talk here at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

As for why the Chief Justice of the United States will be spending today and tomorrow at the Northwestern University School of Law, you can access a news release from that law school titled “Chief Justice Roberts to Visit Law School as Trienens Visiting Scholar.”

“Voda v. Cordis: Plaintiff May Not Assert Foreign Patents in US Courts.” “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” provides this post about today’s Federal Circuit ruling, which I earlier noted here.

Back in June 2005, “Patently-O” had this post linking to the appellate briefs filed in the case.

“Accordingly, we join several sister circuits in holding that Congress acted within its Constitutional authority in abrogating sovereign immunity under Title II of the ADA.” So holds a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit today in its decision in Bowers v. NCAA, a case that the court describes as “an ongoing saga.”

“Detainee Challenges U.S. Policy”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Attorneys for an immigrant the Bush administration calls an al-Qaida sleeper agent argued Thursday that their client is being detained unconstitutionally and should be allowed to challenge his imprisonment in court. Ali al-Marri, the only person being held as an enemy combatant on U.S. soil – has indisputable rights as a legal resident of the United States, including the right to due process and the right to challenge his accusers in a court of law, his lawyer, Jonathan Hafetz, told a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”

It ain’t over till it’s over: Back on January 11, 2005, I reported here on the Ninth Circuit’s ruling that day in an appeal presenting the question of “the extent to which a tribal court may exercise jurisdiction over a products liability action arising out of an accident occurring on tribal trust land.” The majority on that divided three-judge panel affirmed a federal district court’s decision that “the tribal court lacked jurisdiction over Ford Motor Company.”

Today, more than two years later, that very same three-judge panel has entered an order withdrawing its original opinion. Today’s order, in which all three judges have joined, states that “we cannot say that the tribal courts in this case plainly lack jurisdiction over the dispute among Ford Motor Company, the Todecheenes and the Navajo Nation.” Today’s order remands the case to the federal district court “with instructions that the district court stay proceedings in this matter pending exhaustion of available proceedings in the tribal courts, including appellate review.”

Speaking of special masters: The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Montana Sues Wyoming Over Water Rights” that begins, “Montana sued Wyoming in the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday over water rights in two shared rivers, which Montana claims are running dry due to Wyoming’s overuse.”

And to think, I had only 91 hours and 20 minutes left before I would have downloaded the entire, 670MB .wav audio file of the Sixth Circuit’s oral argument yesterday in the ACLU v. NSA case: Kudos to the Sixth Circuit’s web site, which has replaced the earlier, humongously large audio file of yesterday’s oral argument (in .wav format) with a much smaller mp3 audio file of the same oral argument that should take less than an hour to download. To download the audio file, right click on the link and select “save target as.”

One can look far and wide, without any success, to find a court web site that’s more responsive to user complaints than the Sixth Circuit’s site. It was wonderful that the Sixth Circuit saw fit to post this audio file so promptly in the first instance and then to replace the audio file with a much more easily downloadable version once blogs and others began to observe that the original file, because of its large size, was taking far too long to download.

“Once upon a time in D.C.” Today in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, columnist Linda P. Campbell has this op-ed imagining a conversation among the U.S. Supreme Court‘s Justices over cameras in their courtroom.

“The question here is simply whether, in a dispute between United States entities of whom the district court has personal jurisdiction, does the court have discretion to resolve aspects that concern foreign patents. The panel majority’s conclusion that the court cannot exercise its discretion to do so is contrary to principle, practice, and judicial obligation.” So writes Circuit Judge Pauline Newman, dissenting today from the ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Soon you’ll be able to see for yourself just how special those masters really are: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Special Master reports now online.” Now if only the U.S. Supreme Court would begin posting online at its web site its own opinions just minutes after they were announced in the courtroom instead of an hour or two later, all would be right with the world.

Update: You can access the special master reports via this link.

“Dynegy figure in limbo; Four months later, it’s not clear where accountant is going to end up”: The Houston Chronicle today contains an article that begins, “More than four months after his 24-year prison sentence was cut to six years, former Dynegy accountant Jamie Olis remains in the federal detention center in downtown Houston, a facility typically home to inmates with short sentences or awaiting court appearances.”

And today at the “Houston’s Clear Thinkers” blog, Tom Kirkendall has a post titled “Has the BOP forgotten about Jamie Olis?”

“Lawsuit challenging U-M undergraduate admissions policy dismissed after 10 years; Plaintiffs will receive $10K each to cover costs; no damages”: The Detroit News today contains an article that begins, “The historic lawsuit that challenged the use of affirmative action in the University of Michigan’s undergraduate admissions was dismissed today — a decade after the class-action lawsuit was filed and nearly four years after the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case.”

The Detroit Free Press reports today that “U-M admissions policy suit is settled.”

And The Michigan Daily reports that “Suit that began it all ends: Suit against ‘U’ admissions policy settled after 10 years in court.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: Today’s broadcast contained audio segments entitled “‘Enemy Combatant’ Fights for Due Process“; “ACLU Won’t Quit Fight over Eavesdropping“; “Cooper, Miller Contradict Libby on CIA Leak” (featuring Nina Totenberg); and “House Studies Impact of Bush ‘Signing Statements.’”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit provides online access to the audio recording of yesterday’s oral argument in the ACLU v. NSA appeal: You can access the file via this link (670MB .wav file) (to download the file, right click on the link and select “save target as”).

Earlier today, I collected press coverage of yesterday’s oral argument at this link.

Update: This huge audio file will take a mere 63 hours and 20 minutes to download, thanks to the Sixth Circuit’s narrow bandwidth. There’s more discussion of that in this post at “Balkinization.”

Congratulations to best-selling author Jan Crawford Greenburg: The ABC News correspondent’s new book — “Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court and America’s Future” — will debut at number 15 on The New York Times Book Review’s list of hardcover non-fiction best sellers on Sunday, February 11, 2007.

Jan’s tour in support of her new book will have her at Pepperdine University School of Law in sunny Malibu, California this afternoon to discuss the book with Jonathan Varat, Jesse Choper, Professor Doug Kmiec, and Dean Ken Starr. Details here.

And on Saturday afternoon, Jan will be at the Book Passage bookstore in San Francisco. Details here.

I’ve nearly finished reading Jan’s book, and I can join in the chorus of those who have highly recommended it.

“Ex-Time Reporter Testifies in Libby Trial; Cooper Tells of Aide Unmasking Plame”: This article appears today in The Washington Post, along with an article headlined “Jurors’ Queries Yield Insights — And Laughs; Judge in Libby Case Among Few Allowing Such Practice.”

The Los Angeles Times today contains articles headlined “Rove revealed agent’s name, reporter says; At Libby’s trial, Bush’s top political advisor is said to be the original source for the disclosure of a CIA operative” and “Libby trial shows an insular, backbiting Washington.”

In The New York Times, Neil A. Lewis reports that “Former Times Reporter Testimony Is Challenged.”

USA Today contains an article headlined “Reporter: Rove first to leak CIA info; Libby confirmed Plame’s job day later, witness says.”

And The New York Sun reports that “Time Reporter Cooper Says Libby Confirmed Plame’s Identity.”

“Bid for public discussion on executions; Newspapers file to prohibit secretive alteration of system”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Leeway urged for judges; A Senate panel calls for sentencing latitude after U.S. court faults state prison-terms law”: This article appeared yesterday in The Sacramento Bee.

“Federal judge won’t seek U.S. attorney post in Los Angeles; Dickran Tevrizian, a leading candidate for the L.A. post, is said to have withdrawn his name”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“U.S. to give Congress records on spying program; The attorney general’s decision to hand over the material on domestic surveillance ends a two-week confrontation”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

And The Washington Times reports today that “Gonzales to give Congress secret surveillance papers.”

Last night, I collected additional related press coverage at this link.

Lots of interest in this appeal: The Montgomery Advertiser today contains an article headlined “State may get $1B in interest from Exxon” that begins, “The state of Alabama is earning $1.18 million a day in interest as its case against Exxon Mobil awaits a ruling from the Alabama Supreme Court. The state will get the interest, more than $1 billion and counting, only if the Alabama Supreme Court upholds the $3.6 billion verdict against the Texas oil company.”

“Appeals court says tax system doesn’t segregate”: This article appears today in The Birmingham News.

My coverage of yesterday’s Eleventh Circuit ruling can be accessed here.

And you thought “Choose Life” was controversial: The St. Petersburg Times reports today that “Confederate group seeks flag on tag.”

And last Friday’s issue of The Chicago Tribune contained a related editorial entitled “License to offend.”