“Prosecutor Under Fire in Teen Sex Case”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “David McDade has handed out some 35 copies of a video of teenagers having sex at a party. McDade is no porno kingpin, but a district attorney.”

“Some British Judges to Lose Their Wigs”: The Associated Press provides this report.

The criminal suspect’s last name was Askew, and as the result of a disputed police search so was his jacket: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today issued an order granting rehearing en banc in United States v. Askew.

In a decision issued in April 2007, the majority on a divided three-judge panel held that “the police during a Terry show-up may reasonably maneuver a suspect’s outer clothing (such as unzipping an outer jacket so a witness can see the suspect’s clothing) when taking that step could assist a witness’s identification.” Once police maneuvered his jacket, the askew nature of Askew’s clothing revealed that he was a felon in possession of a handgun.

It appears from today’s order that Senior Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards, the dissenter on the original three-judge panel, has elected to participate in the rehearing en banc. Senior circuit judges do not have a vote on whether to grant rehearing en banc, but if rehearing en banc is granted they can participate in the decision if they were on the original three-judge panel and the case is pending in their home circuit.

Assuming that neither of the two active D.C. Circuit judges in the original three-judge panel’s majority voted in favor of rehearing en banc, at least six of the remaining eight active judges on the D.C. Circuit must have voted for rehearing en banc. That doesn’t bode well for the panel’s decision surviving en banc review unscathed.

My earlier coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling appears at this link.

“Going South on Southwick? The disgraceful performance of Senate Democrats.” Edward Whelan has this essay today at National Review Online.

“House Panel: Miers Wrong to Miss Hearing.” The Associated Press provides this report.

“Judge Okays Libby Probation; Criticizes Bush’s Clemency Order”: Josh Gerstein of The New York Sun provides this news update.

The Supreme Court of Washington State delivers some bad news for the new AT&T: In a decision issued today, Washington State’s highest court has ruled 6-3 that an arbitration clause contained in Cingular’s standard subscriber contracts prohibiting class action litigation or arbitration is invalid, thereby voiding the arbitration clause in its entirety. Today’s ruling consists of both a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

“The Democratic (Not So) Short List”: Tom Goldstein has this interesting post at “SCOTUSblog.”

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton holds that I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s sentence of supervised release remains in effect: You can access today’s decision at this link.

“Showdown Looms Over Fired Prosecutors”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Specter leads revolt on stalled nomination”: The Politico provides a report that begins, “Social conservatives are mobilizing for a new showdown with Democrats over judicial appointments, answering a call to action from an unlikely source: Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee whose moderate stances on abortion and other issues have made for an uneasy relationship with his party’s right-leaning base.”

“Harriet Miers Told to Shirk House Judiciary Hearing”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Ping, Golf Club Maker, Scores Hole-in-One in High Court Ruling”: James Rowley of Bloomberg News provides a report that begins, “To golf club manufacturer Ping Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling relaxing antitrust standards looks like a hole-in-one.”

“A rare sighting: Reason in the law.” Paul Greenberg has this op-ed today in The Washington Times.

“Georgia teen sex case video stirs uproar; A U.S. attorney says the tape handed out by a district attorney constitutes ‘child pornography under federal law.'” This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution today contains an article headlined “Feds: Douglas DA violated porn laws.”

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Feds: Teen Sex Tape Is Child Pornography.”

“Miers Rebuffs Senate Subpoena; Another Ex-Aide Says She Did Not Speak With Bush About Firings”: The Washington Post contains this article today, along with an article headlined “A Bush Aide’s Long Road From The White House.” And Dana Milbank’s “Washington Sketch” column is headlined “Against Claims of Executive Privilege, a Committee Comes Up Dry.”

The New York Times reports today that “Ex-White House Aide Says Bush Wasn’t Involved in Attorney Firings.”

The Los Angeles Times contains an article headlined “Disregard subpoenas, Justice Dept. says; The opinion raises questions over whether Bush officials would be prosecuted for not cooperating in probe of U.S. attorneys firings.”

McClatchy Newspapers report that “Bush halts Miers’ testimony, provoking threat from Congress.”

And in The Boston Globe, Law Professor Cass R. Sunstein has an op-ed entitled “Defining executive privilege.”

“Panel: Justice’s behavior improper; N.J. Supreme Court Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto intervened in his son’s dispute.” This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

And The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reports today that “Ethics panel wants N.J. judge censured; Report: Justice Rivera-Soto broke rules.”

My most recent earlier coverage appears at this link.

“The Lawsuit against a Lawyer Rating Service: Why the Suit Might Lead the Service to Improve, Becoming More Transparent.” Anita Ramasastry has this essay online today at FindLaw.

“Specter says Dems broke their promise”: The Hill today contains an article that begins, “Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has fired an early volley in what Senate Republicans and conservative activists predict will escalate into another pitched battle with Democrats on judicial nominees.”