“Date Missed, Court Shuns Low-I.Q. Man Facing Death”: In Saturday’s edition of The New York Times, Adam Liptak will have an article that begins, “Though the Supreme Court has prohibited the execution of the mentally retarded, a Texas death row inmate who may be retarded cannot raise the issue in federal court because his lawyer missed a filing deadline, a federal appeals court ruled this week.” You can access the recent ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.
Available online from law.com: An article is headlined “Closing the Patent Litigation Spigot.”
In other news, “Strong Economy Fuels Pay Hikes for Judges.”
An article reports that “California Supreme Court Will Consider Spousal-Rights Fray; Case reads like a TV soap opera but involves serious issues about spousal rights and wrongful death.”
And in other news, “5th Circuit OKs Bankruptcy Lawyer’s Unique Fee Agreement.”
“Bobblehead Tax Deductions”: “TaxProf Blog” offers this post.
“US judge sets filing deadline in RIM patent case”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “The U.S. judge overseeing the patent infringement case against BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd. on Friday ordered both sides to file final legal briefs by February 1 as he considers a request that could halt the popular mobile e-mail service.”
“Padilla Lawyers Say U.S. Playing Games”: The Associated Press provides this report.
“Court urged to deny Padilla appeal”: Lyle Denniston provides this report at “SCOTUSblog.” That blog has posted online both the federal government’s brief in opposition and the appendix accompanying it. In addition, the Washington Legal Foundation has filed this amicus brief opposing cert.
“Let’s see some ID, please: The end of anonymity on the Internet?” Michael Rogers, who writes “The Practical Futurist” column for MSNBC, had this essay earlier this week.
“Padilla seeks to keep appeal alive”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
In today’s edition of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: An article headlined “Justices: State shorted schools” begins, “The Arkansas Supreme Court again declared Arkansas’ system of public education funding unconstitutionally inadequate Thursday and again set a deadline for state lawmakers to fix it.” You can access yesterday’s ruling at this link.
And in other news, “Lincoln meets with Alito, plans further scrutiny.”
Developments in the Jose Padilla case: Counsel for Padilla filed this supplemental brief today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The federal government’s supplemental Fourth Circuit brief was filed one week ago today.
The federal government’s response to Padilla’s cert. petition is due to be filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court amicus curiae brief of Janet Reno, et al. can be accessed here, while other amicus briefs are here and here.
“Judge’s befuddling ruling on public expression on highway overpass to be appealed; ADF attorney: The Constitution does not permit discrimination.” Alliance Defense Fund issued this press release yesterday. The written ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin can be accessed here. I previously noted the ruling here.
“Sex Shops Can Offer Evidence of Their Virtue, Court Says”: The New York Times today contains this article reporting on a decision that the New York State Court of Appeals — that State’s highest court — issued yesterday.
“Mom’s conviction overturned again; Brandy Del Briggs was accused of killing infant son”: The Houston Chronicle provides this news update.
“A sentence like the one in this case is just the sort of red flag that makes legislators wonder whether the courts need mandatory minimum sentences to assure protection of the public.” So writes Circuit Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld in dissent from a ruling that a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel issued today.
Earlier in the dissent, Judge Kleinfeld writes: “Does drawing a district judge whose sentencing philosophy is idiosyncratic make so idiosyncratic a sentence ‘just’? An excessively lenient sentence like this causes cynicism, not only among people in prison, where the luck-of-the-draw sentencing interferes with rehabilitation, but among the law-abiding public. People have second thoughts about doing the right thing when those who do the wrong thing prosper and avoid punishment. Injustice is corrosive.”
“Senate Blocks Extension of Patriot Act”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report. Update: The official roll call vote tally can be accessed here.
“Opponents Of Rule Allowing Non-Precedential U.S. Court Of Appeals Decisions To Be Cited Manage To Insert A Fly In The Ointment”: The text of my monthly appellate column published on Monday of this week in The Legal Intelligencer can now be freely accessed online at this link.
In news from Minnesota: The St. Paul Pioneer Press reports today that “New chief justice named; Russell Anderson, now an associate, moves up; Gildea replaces him.”
The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports today that “Minnesota’s new chief justice shuns politics; Gov. Tim Pawlenty angered conservatives and fostered diversity on the bench with three selections for top jobs.”
And The Forum of Fargo, North Dakota reports that “Pawlenty goes NW in justice selection.”
The text of yesterday’s announcement by Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty can be accessed here.
In South Dakota, conviction of crime for causing prison guard to come into contact with slime means serving plenty of hard time: An article from The Associated Press headlined “Inmate pays extra for sliming guard” reports on this ruling that the Supreme Court of South Dakota issued Wednesday.
“Solomon likely to be upheld, lawyer says”: This article appears today in The Daily Princetonian.
And The Intelligencer of Wheeling, West Virginia today contains an editorial entitled “Draw Line Between Principles, Money” that concludes, “One hopes the Supreme Court justices uphold the Solomon Amendment, and thereby not only uphold the federal government’s right to attach conditions to the use of taxpayers’ money but also draw a constitutional distinction between principle and mere fashion.”
“Evolution attorney under fire”: The Marietta (Ga.) Daily Journal today contains an article that begins, “Federal appeals judges roasted the attorney fighting evolution disclaimers placed in Cobb science textbooks during oral arguments before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday, suggesting that he misled the court in his legal brief.” I earlier linked to additional coverage of yesterday’s Eleventh Circuit oral argument here and here.
“Altria looks ahead after ‘light’ ruling; Experts say Illinois ruling will not end anti-smoking advocates’ battles over ‘light’ cigarettes”: Fortune provides this report. Earlier today, I collected additional related news coverage here.
“Rule of Law: Canvassers must heed affirmative action order.” The Detroit Free Press today contains an editorial that begins, “Contemptible. That’s the best word for what happened at the Board of State Canvassers meeting Wednesday in Lansing. The board deserves to be held in legal contempt for defying an explicit order from the state Court of Appeals to place an anti-affirmative action proposal on next year’s state ballot.”
File under miscellaneous: For whatever reason, direct links to posts at “How Appealing” have stopped working for the zillion or so posts that have appeared since midday Wednesday. Until the powers-that-be have the issue resolved, I’ll try my best to avoid writing posts to which other bloggers would have any interest in linking. Thus, there will be no more mentions of the University of Western Ontario stripper for the time being (but see Tony Pierce). [Update: As hoped, the problem with direct links to recent posts not working has been fixed.]
Congratulations to “Law Dork,” which has won the honor of “Best Law Blog” in the 2005 Weblog Awards: Complete results of the balloting can be accessed here. Second place belongs to “The Volokh Conspiracy,” which garnered one thousand fewer votes than the winner.
“Appeals Panel Criticizes Evolution Ruling; A federal district judge had ordered the removal of stickers in a Georgia county’s science textbooks that called evolution a theory”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.
And The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports today that “Appeals judges skeptical about Cobb ruling; Evolution disclaimers were ‘literally accurate.’”
“Justice is blind, but judges can see things differently”: Today in The St. Petersburg Times, columnist Sue Carlton has an op-ed that begins, “In one county, a judge signs off on a plea deal for a teacher who had sex with her teenage student. In another, a judge rejects the very same deal. And we thought the sensational Debra Lafave case was as over as Nick and Jessica.”
“Lincoln meets Supreme Court nominee”: The Arkansas News Bureau provides this report.
“The Get-Out-of-Torture-Free Card: Why is Congress banning torture but allowing the use of torture testimony?” Emily Bazelon has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“$10 billion tobacco judgment reversed; State high court rules for Philip Morris”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that “Court smokes $10 billion verdict.”
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch contains articles headlined “Tobacco penalty tossed out“; “Judge who ruled in ’03 against Philip Morris has no comment“; and “Madison County cashes in on interest from cigarette suit.”
The Washington Post reports that “Court Overturns $10 Billion Verdict Against Philip Morris.”
And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Philip Morris Wins Reversal of Verdict; An Illinois court rejects a $10-billion award over the firm’s marketing of its ‘light’ cigarettes.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Court sense.”
“From the President to the Impoverished, When It Comes To Reporting for Jury Duty, Who Among Us Truly Deserves A ‘Get Out Of Your Summons Free’ Card?” Jonna M. Spilbor has this essay online today at FindLaw.
