“Al-Arian Files Habeas for Release”: Josh Gerstein of The New York Sun has this news update.

Recently on C-SPAN’s “America and the Courts“: This past Saturday’s broadcast was titled “Panel on the American Press in Times of War.” C-SPAN has also made the entire panel presentation available for viewing at this link.

And the broadcast from two Saturdays ago was titled “Linda Greenhouse, Former New York Times Supreme Court Reporter.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these video clips.

Reviews of Christopher Buckley’s forthcoming novel “Supreme Courtship“: The Associated Press has a review headlined “Judge Judy on the Supreme Court? Buckley’s latest political satire is breezy and delightful.”

Monday in The New York Times, Janet Maslin had a review of the book headlined “A Texas Babe to Join the Brethren (Any Dissenting Opinions?)”

And on Sunday, The Washington Post published this review of the book.

“Dissent upsets high court; Majority stifled fellow justice’s opinion, only to OK it after media calls, Diaz says”: This article appeared last Saturday in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi.

“Wyoming loses gun case in federal court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court in Denver has ruled that a Wyoming state law that seeks to allow people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to regain their gun rights fails to meet federal requirements. A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday ruled that the procedure spelled out in Wyoming law actually fails to expunge the criminal record of people convicted of domestic violence.”

In response to the ruling, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has today issued a news release headlined “Brady Center Hails Court Ruling Blocking Domestic Abusers From Getting Guns.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit at this link.

“Judge fears secret hearings over Guantanamo Bay”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Exxon Valdez settlement checks could be distributed in October; Partial agreement reached in long case”: The Anchorage Daily News today contains an article that begins, “Lawyers in the epic Exxon Valdez court case have negotiated a settlement to pay out most of the $507.5 million the U.S. Supreme Court awarded in June, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs confirmed Tuesday.”

“Top Mexico court shows support for abortion law”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court indicated Wednesday it will uphold a Mexico City law allowing abortion that has divided the country. Four of the 11 Supreme Court justices said during deliberations that they would vote against declaring the law unconstitutional. Eight votes would be needed to strike it down.”

Not an erotic dancing opinion, but nevertheless worth a look: An opinion in a case captioned 216 Jamaica Avenue v. S & R Playhouse has perhaps a better than average chance at involving erotic entertainment, but alas that proved not to be the case with regard to this decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.

Yet the opinion remains of interest because the decision considers the enforceability of a contractual provision, contained in a lease executed in 1911, stating that “[a]ll of said rents shall be paid in gold coin of the United States of the present standard of weight and fineness.” The trial court had held that the provision was unenforceable. But today, in an opinion by Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, the Sixth Circuit reaches the opposite conclusion.

“Bush steps up fight over congressional authority”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Bush administration is raising the stakes in a court fight that could change the balance of power between the White House and Congress. Justice Department lawyers said Wednesday that they will soon ask a federal appeals court not to force the president’s top advisers to comply with congressional subpoenas next month. President Bush argues Congress doesn’t have the authority to demand information from his aides.”

Retrospective programming note: No posts appeared here after 4 p.m. yesterday because my son and I last night were at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia to watch the Phillies host the New York Mets. You can access the box score at this link, while wraps are available here and here.

The thirteen-inning game made for a late, but ultimately very satisfying, night at the ballpark. Additional coverage can be accessed here and here.

With the Phillies on the road this weekend in Chicago, the next baseball game that my son and I will be attending will be this Sunday’s game at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C., where the Nationals will host the Atlanta Braves. Some readers may recall that we made our first trek down to that new ballpark earlier this year, on Memorial Day weekend.

“Judge Allows No Delay of Miers’s Testimony About Fired Prosecutors”: Dan Eggen has this article today in The Washington Post.

You can access at this link yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Nudists in court battle in California: According to an article headlined “Nudists Want State to Look the Other Way” published today in The New York Times, the dispute concerns “a remote patch of San Onofre State Beach, where birthday suits far outnumber bathing ones.”

In the very unlikely event that the dispute reaches the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the nudists are reminded that they must wear at least a necktie if arguing the case pro se.

“The Myth of Biden v. Bork”: In today’s issue of The New York Times, Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen has an op-ed that begins, “When Joseph R. Biden Jr. stands on the podium in Denver tonight as Barack Obama’s vice presidential nominee, conservatives of a certain age will see a bogeyman who, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, presided over the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.”

“Federal obscenity case, filed 5 years ago, has stalled”: Today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Paula Reed Ward has an article that begins, “In August 2003, the U.S. attorney’s office in Pittsburgh made national headlines by filing obscenity charges against a California company that makes graphic pornography. At the time, many saw the case against Extreme Associates as a prelude of things to come under then-Attorney General John Ashcroft. But in the five years since, the case has languished. There had been no entries in the case docket since Aug. 17, 2007, until a reporter called the judge’s chambers last week to inquire about the case.” (Via “LawBeat“).

“Review shows Biden’s ‘intersection of interests’ on bill; Opposed measure to cut down on asbestos lawsuits”: This article appears today in USA Today.

“FBI Accused Of Violating 1st Amendment”: Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article that begins, “The American Civil Liberties Union today will ask an appeals court in Manhattan to rule that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s use of so-called national security letters violates the First Amendment.”