“1937, 2010”: Online at The New Republic, Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner has this review of Jeff Shesol’s new book, “Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. the Supreme Court.”

“Hear the Uighurs: The critical Guantanamo case the Supreme Court should not duck.” Rebecca Crootof and law professor Oona A. Hathaway have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Activist’s case will test U.S. anti-terrorism law; USC professor Ralph Fertig says he’s protected under the 1st Amendment for advocating for the Kurdish minority in Turkey, whose political party has been designated a terrorist group by the U.S.” David G. Savage will have this article Thursday in The Los Angeles Times.

“Judge Puts Liberal Imprint on New York’s Top Court”: This article will appear Thursday in The New York Times.

“Were this case simply about an innocent game of canasta, I would readily join the opinion of my majority colleagues outright.” So begins the dissenting opinion that Tenth Circuit Judge Carlos F. Lucero issued today. The dissent continues, “However, the abrupt departure of the trial judge from the bench while defense counsel was discussing the testimony of defendant’s star witness, when coupled with the court’s earlier admonitions to the jury that the same witness’s testimony was ‘absolutely untrue’ and a ‘falsity,’ can only be interpreted as a clear message to the jury that the witness was not credible or worthy of the court and jury’s unbiased consideration.”

According to the majority opinion, the trial judge left the bench during defense counsel’s closing argument to the jury in this federal criminal case because it was “his secretary’s afternoon to play canasta and he had to get a couple of letters out.”

“Roberts versus Roberts: Just how radical is the chief justice?” Law professor Jeffrey Rosen has this article online at The New Republic.

Who says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit doesn’t hear interesting cases? Francisco Javier Rivera Agredano purchased a 1987 Nissan Pathfinder from the federal agency known as U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The agency had obtained the automobile via forfeiture after the Pathfinder’s former owner attempted to transport marijuana across the Mexican border into the United States.

Unbeknownst to both Customs and Agredano, the Pathfinder contained additional marijuana in a hidden compartment that Customs failed to locate. Later, when Agredano and his brother-in-law were traveling in the vehicle in Mexico, they came upon a checkpoint operated by Mexican soldiers. The soldiers operating the checkpoint were a bit more thorough than U.S. Customs, and as a result both men were arrested and spent nearly a year in prison before being exonerated by a Mexican appellate court on January 10, 2003.

Today’s appellate court ruling, by contrast, fails to deliver good news for Agredano, as the Federal Circuit has reversed a U.S. Court of Federal Claims decision in Agredano’s favor. The trial court had ruled that Agredano’s contract to purchase the vehicle contained an implied-in-fact warranty that the vehicle did not contain contraband and that Customs breached the warranty.

In coverage of the Court of Federal Claims’ earlier ruling, the August 18, 2008 edition of The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that “Man who bought car full of pot wins case; U.S. purchase led to year in Mexican jail.”

“Rigases fight second trial in US appeals court”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Justice Department efforts to pursue a second fraud trial for an imprisoned cable television mogul and his son amount to constitutionally prohibited double jeopardy, a defense lawyer argued Wednesday before an 11-judge U.S. appeals panel.”

The case was reargued en banc today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

“Judge’s confirmation one of many stalled; Filibusters slow U.S. Senate in approving jurists, including Vanaskie of Clarks Green”: Today’s edition of The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania contains an article that begins, “In December, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 16-3 in support of the nomination of U.S. District Judge Thomas I. Vanaskie to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clarks Green resident’s nomination was sent to the full Senate awaiting a confirmation vote. More than two months later, no action has been taken.”

“Lifers’ fates rest with N.C. Supreme Court”: The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina today contains an article that begins, “The fate of dozens of inmates sentenced to life in the 1970s is now in the hands of seven Supreme Court justices who grilled an attorney for the state Tuesday about how prison officials have handled credits for good behavior.”

“Starr receives warm welcome at introduction to Baylor University community”: This article appears today in The Waco Tribune-Herald, along with an article headlined “That’s Kent with a ‘T’: Local dentist says there’s room for plenty of Starrs in Waco.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports today that “Some worry how Starr appointment will affect Baylor.”

And The Lariat, the student newspaper of Baylor University, contains articles headlined “Welcoming Kenneth Starr” and “Students protest ‘controversial’ president.”

“‘Life’ definition petitioned; Ballot push seeks to challenge Roe v. Wade”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contains this article today.

And in related news, The Associated Press reports that “Nevada ‘personhood’ advocates appeal court ruling.”

“Justice backs selection bill; He says it would ‘probably’ be beneficial to give the governor authority to pick chief justice”: This article appears today in The Salt Lake Tribune.

“Speeding case in Supreme Court; Fairlawn man challenging whether police officer can issue ticket based on sight, not radar gun”: Today’s edition of The Akron Beacon Journal contains an article that begins, “Many people vow they’re going to fight their speeding ticket all the way to the Supreme Court. Today, Fairlawn entrepreneur and motorist Mark Jenney will have his day in court.”

The web site of the Supreme Court of Ohio has a preview of the case headlined “Is Trained Officer’s Visual Estimate of Vehicle Speed Sufficient to Support Conviction for Speeding?”

“U.S. Supreme Court: Will Lilly Ledbetter be black firefighters’ heroine?” UPI has this report.

“Poll: Large majority opposes Supreme Court’s decision on campaign financing.” The Washington Post has a news update that begins, “Americans of both parties overwhelmingly oppose a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations and unions to spend as much as they want on political campaigns, and most favor new limits on such spending, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.”

And Gary Langer of ABC News has a blog post titled “In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents.”

You can access the poll questions and results at this link.

“Senate Republicans Wage Stealth War Over Judges”: David Ingram of The National Law Journal has this report.