“The ‘People’s Veto’: A way to keep the courts in check.” Thomas Donnelly has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Telecom customers may sue government over wiretapping, court says; An appellate panel reinstates a lawsuit against the federal government over post-9/11 warrantless wiretapping and sends the case back to U.S. district court for trial”: Carol J. Williams will have this article Friday in The Los Angeles Times.

And at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Court Revives NSA Dragnet Surveillance Case.”

My earlier coverage of today’s three related Ninth Circuit rulings (rulings that can be accessed here, here, and here) appears at this link.

“Heller Attorneys Awarded $1.1M in Fees, One-Third of Their Request”: Sam Skolnik has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

And The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Judge orders D.C. to pay $1.1 million in legal fees for handgun ownership lawsuit.”

My earlier coverage of today’s ruling appears at this link.

“When the police find a plastic baggie full of suspected drugs attached to a man’s penis, does it violate the Fourth Amendment for the police to cut it off with a knife?” So begins a post at “walshslaw” reporting on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued today.

Lest there be any misunderstanding, the “it” that was cut off was the baggie, and not the man’s penis.

Update: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “Fourth Circuit Overturns Conviction Because Officer Used A Knife to Remove the Crack Tied Around An Arrestee’s Private Parts.”

And “walshslaw” has a follow-up post titled “How likely is it that a police officer will mistakenly cut when using a knife to remove a drug-containing baggie tied around a particular male body part?”

“DC ordered to pay $1M in historic gun case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The District of Columbia has been ordered to pay more than $1 million in attorneys’ fees as a result of a historic gun case that was ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.”

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

“2011: The Year Intellectual Property Trumped Civil Liberties.” David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“U.S. court upholds telecom immunity for surveillance”: Dan Levine of Reuters has a report that begins, “A U.S. appeals panel on Thursday upheld immunity for telecom companies that assist the U.S. government in conducting surveillance of American citizens.”

The same three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued three separate decisions on three related appeals today, and you can access those three rulings here, here, and here.

Update: In other coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Federal court revives government wiretapping suit.”

“California Supreme Court allows redevelopment money grab”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has this update.

Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has a blog post titled “State Supreme Court upholds abolition of redevelopment agencies.”

The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update headlined “State wins right to abolish redevelopment agencies.”

The San Diego Union-Tribune has a news update headlined “Redevelopment dead, court says; California Supreme Court says local agencies can’t remain by paying state.”

The Sacramento Bee has a blog post titled “California high court says state can eliminate redevelopment.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Court splits decision over redevelopment funding.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

“King Newt takes on the judges”: Roger Pilon has this op-ed today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Alabama voters often in the dark on judicial races”: This article appears today in The Birmingham News.

“Man charged with felony for reading wife’s e-mail ready to take case to Michigan Supreme Court”: Today’s edition of The Detroit Free Press contains an article that begins, “A Rochester Hills man charged with a five-year felony for reading his wife’s e-mail pledged Wednesday to take the matter to the state’s highest court after a lower court refused to dismiss the charge.”

And The Daily Tribune of Mount Clemens, Michigan reported yesterday that “E-mail snooper loses appellate bid.”

You can access Tuesday’s unpublished ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals at this link.

“Gingrich’s plan on courts would face resistance”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Gov. Jerry Brown weighs clemency petition for a grandmother; Brown is being asked to commute the 15-year-to-life sentence of Shirley Ree Smith, convicted of killing her grandchild; An appeals court had overturned her conviction; the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated it”: Maura Dolan has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.