“Putting the tribunals on trial: A test for the American military commissions that are supposed to try suspected terrorists.” This article appears online at the web site of The Economist magazine.

“It’s counties against state again in appeal of pot suit”: Today’s edition of The San Diego Union-Tribune contains an article that begins, “Nineteen months after a judge rejected San Diego County’s lawsuit against the state of California seeking to overturn medical marijuana laws, government lawyers are returning to court to argue their appeals. In a case being watched closely by counties around the state, oral arguments are scheduled for 9 a.m. Tuesday in a 4th District Court of Appeal courtroom in downtown San Diego.”

“W.Va. justices question need for additional court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Most of West Virginia’s Supreme Court justices question the need for a midlevel appeals court, a proposal raised after they refused to hear two cases involving a combined $664 million in damages.”

“Va. high court revisits spam case; Convicted spammer is challenging law as being unconstitutionally broad”: Thursday’s edition of The Richmond Times-Dispatch contained this article.

“Top state court marks 200th anniversary”: This article appeared last week in The Connecticut Post.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Mo. governor candidate’s legal work draws scrutiny” and “Judge seeks end to 12-year suit over Indian money.”

“Supreme Court could hear challenge to Voting Rights Act; Law that requires permission to change elections under fire”: The Shreveport Times today contains an article that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court could decide whether Louisiana must keep asking the Justice Department for permission to change how it conducts elections.”

“Trial of Judge Allen likely to be intense; Ethics and perjury case going to trial Monday is ‘unprecedented'”: Today in The Pensacola News Journal, Paul Flemming has an article that begins, “Illicit sex. Profane outbursts. Lies. And that’s just the judges. On Monday, Michael Allen, a 1st District Court of Appeal judge, goes on trial before a panel of the Judicial Qualification Commission. If the charges against him are found to have merit, he ultimately could be removed from the bench. His case — that flamed into public when he called out a fellow judge in the usually staid pages of a court opinion — has roiled the state’s largest, most influential appeal court in Tallahassee for more than four years.”

The newspaper also contains articles headlined “Roots of the case against Judge Michael Allen” and “W.D. Childers’ role in the Judge Allen case.”

“Supreme Court’s caseload slows; Analysis of state Supreme Court action finds a decline over eight years”: The Tulsa World today contains an article that begins, “The number of appeals and court actions at the Oklahoma Supreme Court have declined significantly in eight years because of the chilling effect of legislative reforms and due to mediated lawsuits, court officials said.”

“Roanoke Valley judge up for Va. Supreme Court; Clifford Weckstein has been endorsed by one bar association, but a political snare may complicate the appointment process”: This article appears today in The Roanoke Times.

“The Supreme Court’s Term So Far: An Unusual Degree of Agreement, With Liberals Joining ‘Conservative’ Rulings and Vice-Versa.” Edward Lazarus has this essay online at FindLaw.