“Judge delays war-crimes trial for Supreme Court”: Today in The Miami Herald, Carol Rosenberg has an article that begins, “A military commissions judge Friday postponed the scheduled trial of Osama bin Laden’s driver until after the U.S. Supreme Court has decided another key detainee case.” You can access the ruling at this link.
The New York Times reports today that “Detainee’s Trial Delayed Until Justices Rule.”
The Associated Press reports that “US postpones first Guantanamo war crimes trial.”
And in The Los Angeles Times, Carol J. Williams reports that “Defenders of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, 4 others ask Guantanamo judge to dismiss charges; They say tribunal legal advisor Thomas Hartmann — who’s been barred from a case against Osama bin Laden’s driver — acted unfairly and illegally to get KSM and his alleged co-conspirators prosecuted.”
“Pa. Justices Hear Arguments Over ‘Control’ of Images in Child Porn Case; Authorities found the images in the cache file of man’s Web browser”: law.com provides this report.
I addressed this issue in the December 4, 2006 installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com, headlined “Just Looking: Should Internet Ignorance Be a Defense to Child Porn Charges?”
“Magisterial Conviction: Why the California Supreme Court did more than legalize gay marriage.” Law Professor Kenji Yoshino has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“35-year sentence for HIV-positive spitter worries some”: This article appears today in The Dallas Morning News.
“Michigan gays can wed in California; Bonds still won’t be valid here, but expect West Coast trips, state’s gay marriage backers say”: The Detroit News contains this article today.
“FBI agent denies bullying in Fieger case”: This article appears today in The Detroit Free Press.
And The Detroit News reports today that “FBI agent in Fieger case describes rare pre-raid talks.”
“Crown must justify adult sentences: ruling.” The Toronto Globe and Mail today contains an article that begins, “A fractured Supreme Court of Canada yesterday struck down a law forcing young offenders who are guilty of serious, violent offences to be sentenced as adults unless they can prove it would be unfair to them. The 5-4 ruling drew immediate condemnation from the federal government, with Justice Minister Rob Nicholson sounding a battle cry against soft treatment for young offenders.”
The Toronto Star reports today that “Supreme Court shakes youth act; Forcing violent teens to prove they should not face adult prison terms ruled unconstitutional.”
The Winnipeg Sun contains an article headlined “Court ruling ripper: Provinces, feds at odds over fighting youth crime.”
The Montreal Gazette reports that “Quebec rights commission delighted by high court ruling; Federal law didn’t respect rights charter, child justice advocates contend.”
The Canadian Press reports that “Top court declares reverse onus on youth sentencing unconstitutional.”
CBC News reports that “Top court rules Crown must prove convicted youth deserve adult punishment.”
Canwest News Service reports that “Top court snubs Tory youth crime agenda; Parts of law unconstitutional; Placed onus on some youths to convince judge why they shouldn’t be tried as adults.”
Retuers reports that “Canada must treat young killers gently, court says.”
And online at National Post, Colby Cosh has an essay entitled “The Supreme Court’s young-offender decision: All bets are off for journalists.”
You can access yesterday’s 5-4 ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada at this link.
“Same-Sex Marriage and Racial Justice Find Common Ground”: Adam Liptak has this news analysis today in The New York Times.
The Los Angeles Times today contains an article headlined “In Massachusetts, a test run for same-sex marriage; Many in the state welcome California’s Supreme Court ruling this week.”
And The San Francisco Chronicle contains articles headlined “Governor backs same-sex marriage ruling“; “Whipsawed gay couples brace for legal twists“; and “County clerks, same-sex couples try to plan.”
