“Expert Witness Dinged $300,000 for Making Fake Child Porn”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.
And Terry Baynes of Reuters reports that “Lawyer owes $300,000 for using child pornography at trial.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Sixth Circuit ruling appears at this link.
Update: In other coverage, Ars Technica has a post titled “Ohio attorney creates fake child porn for case, now must pay $300,000; He altered pics of girls to be explicit in arguing against ‘overbroad’ law.”
“Supreme Court to decide if police can collect DNA from suspects”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Can police collect DNA before conviction? Supreme Court to hear case; Many states allow police to collect DNA samples from people who have been arrested; But others see that as a violation of the Fourth Amendment; Now, the Supreme Court will step in.”
And at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Pivotal DNA Privacy Case Gets Supreme Court Hearing.”
“In View of a Changing South, Court Will Revisit Voting Act”: Adam Liptak will have this article Saturday in The New York Times.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court to review key section of Voting Rights Act.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Is part of Voting Rights Act outdated, unfair? High Court to decide.”
Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to Voting Rights Act.”
Richard Wolf of USA Today has a news update headlined “Supreme Court to hear voting rights case; The Supreme Court will consider a challenge to Congress’ reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which could lead to less federal oversight of the racial impact of state election laws.”
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court to rule on scope of federal powers in Voting Rights Act case; A landmark civil-rights-era law will come before the US Supreme Court later this year, when the justices will consider if Congress was out of bounds in renewing a part of the Voting Rights Act.”
Nina Totenberg of NPR reports that “Supreme Court To Review Voting Rights Act.”
Roll Call reports that “Supreme Court to Examine Need for Critical Part of Voting Rights Law.”
Politico.com reports that “Supreme Court will hear voting rights case.”
Ariane de Vogue of ABC News has a blog post titled “Supreme Court Will Take Up Major Voting Rights Case.”
Online at The Atlantic, law professor Garrett Epps has an essay entitled “The Supreme Court Will Hear a Challenge to the Voting Rights Act; Three days after an election that dramatically tested the right to vote, the court sends a major signal to Obama and Congress.”
And online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay entitled “It’s Appalling that Gerrymandering Is Legal; And if the Supreme Court guts the Voting Rights Act, it’s going to get a lot worse.”
“Foreword: Academic Influence on the Court.” Law professor Neal K. Katyal had this essay in the October 2012 issue of Virginia Law Review.
A glimpse at what I’ve been working on: Yesterday, I filed a Brief for Appellant in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in a case arising out of an arbitration proceeding that Reuters previously reported on here. As the district court’s opinion noted, the case presents the Third Circuit with two questions of first impression.
Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court today granted review in four new cases. You can access today’s Order List at this link.
In early news coverage, Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court to take new look at Voting Rights Act.” The AP also reports that “Court will decide on collection of DNA samples.”
Terry Baynes and Jonathan Stempel of Reuters report that “High Court to review Amex arbitration case.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to rule on voting rights law, DNA case.”
Update: Reuters reports that “Supreme Court to review collection of DNA samples.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Voting Rights Act Challenge Gets U.S. High Court Hearing” and “Business Groups Get Top U.S. Court Hearing on Arbitration.”
At WSJ.com’s “Law Blog,” Brent Kendall has a post titled “Supreme Court to Review DNA Law.”
And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Marcia Coyle has a post titled “Supreme Court to Hear Critical Voting Rights Act Challenge.”
“D.C. Circuit Voids $743K Restitution Order in Pirated Software Case”: Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.
“Citizens United Is Still Worth Hating; Even though the fat-cat super PACs lost at the polls”: Law professor Eric Posner has this essay online at Slate.
And online at The American Prospect, Anthony Kammer has an essay entitled “Just How Bad Was Citizens United For Business? The 2012 election lends further credibility to shareholders’ arguments that they should be able to contest political expenditures.”
“Parents Sue Expert Witness Who Made Fake Child-Porn of Their Kids”: David Kravets had this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog back on January 21, 2011.
Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a ruling upholding a $300,000 judgment entered in favor of those parents and against the expert witness, attorney Dean Boland. Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton wrote today’s opinion.
Back in January 2011, Judge Sutton also wrote an opinion on behalf of the same three-judge panel reinstating the lawsuit that gives rise to today’s decision. My earlier coverage of that ruling can be accessed here and here.
“U.S. Supreme Court affirms stay of execution for Hubert L. Michael Jr.” Joseph A. Slobodzian and Jonathan Lai have this article today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.
“Gay marriage votes could sway Supreme Court”: Terry Baynes of Reuters has this report.
“Obama’s Victory Creates New Chance to Mold U.S. Supreme Court”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.
