“Troy Davis hearing ends; no date yet for decision on new trial”: This article appears today in The Savannah Morning News, along with an article headlined “Wright Square regulars ready for normalcy after Troy Davis case.”
And today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Bill Rankin reports that “Judge must decide whether Troy Davis proved innocence in cop killing.”
“Daley ready to respond if Chicago’s handgun ban overturned”: The Chicago Sun-Times has this news update.
And The Chicago Tribune has a news update headlined “Daley: City Council could consider new gun laws within days of Supreme Court ruling.”
“Court Rejects Secrecy on Ballot Petitions”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.
In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Justices say petition signers should not expect their names to be kept secret.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Court Upholds Law Disclosing Names on Petitions.”
The Chicago Tribune reports that “Supreme Court rules for disclosure of initiative signatures.”
Les Blumenthal of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court deals setback to gay rights foes in ballot case.”
The Seattle Times reports that “Ref. 71 signatures are public, Supreme Court rules.”
SeattlePI.com has a report headlined “Supreme Court on R-71: Names on petitions can be made public; Public disclosure case attracted national attention.”
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Sign a political petition? Supreme Court says the public can know; The case centered on a Washington State referendum on a domestic partnership law; Fear of harassment, the Supreme Court ruled, is not enough to keep petition signers anonymous.”
Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal reports that “High Court Rejects Effort to Keep Names of Petition Signers Secret.”
And yesterday evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Transparency Trumps Privacy In Petitions, Court Says.”
“The ‘Super Median’: On an ideological court, it’s all about keeping Justice Kennedy.” Richard Brust will have this article in the July 2010 issue of ABA Journal magazine.
“Soldiers’ group blasts Kagan on recruitment”: The Associated Press has this report.
“Bilski, Kenny Rogers and Supreme Court Rule 46”: Law professor John F. Duffy has this interesting post today at “Patently-O.”
“Praise for an Israeli Judge Drives Criticism of Kagan”: This article appears today in The New York Times.
Politico.com reports that “All eyes on Kagan’s support of Barak.”
ABCNews.com has a lengthy article headlined “Inside the Mind of Elena Kagan: Mountain of Memos Reveals Clues to Supreme Court Nominee’s Views on Hot Button Issues.”
CNN.com has a report headlined “CNN Poll: Support for Kagan confirmation drops.”
The Associated Press reports that “Major lawyers group calls Kagan well qualified.”
Today’s edition of The Washington Times contains an editorial entitled “The case against Kagan: Radical Obama nominee answers to politics, not the law.”
In The Washington Post, columnist George F. Will has an op-ed entitled “A few ‘vapid’ questions for Kagan.”
And Bloomberg News columnist Ann Woolner has an essay entitled “Bork’s Kagan Comments Remind Why He Was Borked.”
“Judges’ hands tied by oil industry interests; Many presiding in gulf states are heavily invested in the oil and gas industries, creating the possibility of mass recusals in lawsuits and legal challenges stemming from the BP spill”: Carol J. Williams had this article yesterday in The Los Angeles Times.
“As Wone trial closes, judge questions defendants’ reticence”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.
And “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” has posts titled “Prosecutor: Wone Trial Defendants Will Fall Together in Conspiracy” and “Defense: Prosecution’s Case Nothing But ‘Patchwork of Suspicious Circumstances.’”
“Justices Limit Use of ‘Honest Services’ Law Against Fraud”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Conviction in Bruno Case Is in Doubt After Ruling,” an editorial entitled “Balance of Prosecutorial Power,” and an essay by columnist Floyd Norris entitled “Rolling Back a Law Born of Enron.”
In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Supreme Court decision casts doubt on former Enron CEO’s conviction.” The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Defense attorneys laud Supreme Court ruling that casts doubt on CEO convictions.”
The Los Angeles Times contained an article headlined “Supreme Court ruling to narrow anti-corruption law could aid former Enron chief Jeffrey Skilling” and an editorial entitled “A flawed fraud law: The Supreme Court narrows the law’s broad language, which could snare almost any deceitful businessman or politician.”
The Wall Street Journal contains articles headlined “Justices Limit Fraud Law; Court Rules Prosecutors Overreached in Convictions of Enron’s Skilling, Others” and “For Skilling, an Elusive Victory.”
Joan Biskupic of USA Today reports that “Justices limit scope of anti-fraud law, 9-0; Ruling scraps parts of convictions for some famous former executives.”
The Houston Chronicle contains articles headlined “Skilling ruling leaves much undecided; Supreme Court limits scope of federal law, but a long battle looms from prison“; “Former Enron workers’ emotions still raw; But some worry about implications of high court view that one law didn’t apply to Skilling“; and “Sotomayor dissent on trial venue surprises experts; The justice cites media and the effect Enron had on Houston.”
The Chicago Tribune contains articles headlined “Conrad Black could benefit from ‘honest services’ ruling; Supreme Court finds jury was given improper instructions on what constituted fraud in case of former Chicago Sun-Times executive” and “Illinois corruption defendants see opening as court narrows ‘honest services’ law; Attorneys for Blagojevich and Ryan examining if Supreme Court ruling will have repercussions as prosecutors must now rely on more traditional statutes to prove fraud.”
The Chicago Sun-Times contains articles headlined “Prosecutors lose powerful weapon; ‘Honest services’ fraud cases are too vague, justices rule in Enron case” and “Supreme Court decision not likely to help Black, Skilling get out of prison soon.”
The Anchorage Daily News reports that “Court ruling on anti-corruption law impacts Alaska cases; Less precise conflict-of-interest statute thrown out by justices.”
The Toronto Globe and Mail reports that “Black calls ruling ‘immensely gratifying.’”
Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal reports that “In 4 Key Rulings, Supreme Court Limits Fraud Statutes’ Reach; On the civil side, justices ruled that securities fraud class actions involving foreign investors or firms cannot be filed in U.S. courts unless shares were bought or sold within the U.S.”
At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “‘Honest services’ law pared down.”
And from NPR. yesterday evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court Sides With Ex-Enron CEO Skilling” featuring Nina Totenberg. And on today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition,” Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “High Court Reins In Use Of Fraud Law.”
“Dawn Johnsen: ‘I Have No Regrets.'” This audio segment appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”
