“More Than Fit to Print”: In the April 7, 2005 issue of The New York Review of Books, Anthony Lewis has this review of the newly published book “Inside the Pentagon Papers.”

“Viewing Videotape, Frist Disputes Fla. Doctors’ Diagnosis of Schiavo”: This article will appear Saturday in The Washington Post.

Available online from law.com: Marcia Coyle reports that “Justices to Weigh Key Copyright Case; Entertainment industry wants to curb file-sharing.”

Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Will Rehnquist Be Back on the Bench Monday?”

And Shannon P. Duffy has an article headlined “Judge Orders Suspended Attorney to Withdraw From Federal Suit.” Earlier today, I had a lengthy post about this matter in which I linked to some of the background material.

The Sacramento Bee is reporting: Today’s newspaper contains articles headlined “Lungren measure aims to halt gay marriage; Constitutional change would block courts” and “Proving the power of innocence; Activist law students use DNA, other tools to free the wrongly convicted.”

In news from Maine: The Associated Press offers a report headlined “Supreme Court requires Time Warner to identify anonymous e-mailer” that begins, “The state supreme court ruled Friday that Time Warner Cable must turn over account information about the sender of an insulting e-mail in a case that sought to test the waters of Internet anonymity in Maine.”

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

The Knight Ridder Newspapers are reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Terri Schiavo’s Death may come within 2 weeks” and “Senate majority leader, a former Eagle Scout, does a good turn for the Boy Scouts.”

On the topic of the second article, The Tennessean yesterday reported that “Frist moves to protect Boy Scouts’ access.”

A Washington, DC-based reader emails: After reading Rod Smolla‘s jurisprudence essay online at Slate, an appellate lawyer based in the District of Columbia writes:

It always irks me when people who mean to refer to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refer to it as the “District of Columbia Court of Appeals.” There is a court by that name, and it is not the federal appellate court on Third and Constitution. There are lots of shorthands for the D.C. Circuit, including “D.C. Circuit,” “U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit,” “Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit,” etc. Only by truncating both “United States” and “Circuit” can anyone get in trouble.

Never before today, however, have I seen the D.C. Circuit misidentified as the “District of Colombia Court of Appeals.” If the decisionmaker with respect to Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper’s privilege claim was somehow beholden to a shaky South American government, no wonder they lost.

Shades of “de minibus.”

The error this reader is emailing about can be found in the first sentence of the tenth paragraph of Smolla’s essay:

Turning to the reporter’s privilege—now under especially intense scrutiny in courts and Congress, in light of a recent decision by the District of Colombia Court of Appeals arising from the Plame affair—the court held that no First Amendment reporter’s privilege exists at all—and that journalists Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper should report directly to jail without passing go.

“De minibus” indeed.

“Jury begins deliberating in truck death case”: The Houston Chronicle provides a news update that begins, “The jury in the Tyrone Williams trial begin deliberations at 4:45 p.m. today, after prosecutors and Williams’ attorney completed their closing arguments.” If the jury convicts, it would next take up the question of whether to impose the death penalty should the trial judge agree that the law would allow a sentence of death to be imposed.

The perils of taking that swords into plowshares instruction too literally: The Denver Post reports today that “Appeals by nuns rejected; Convictions stand in 3 women’s actions at Weld County missile silo.” And The Associated Press reports that “Sentences Upheld for Nuns in Missile Case.” Last night, I first noted yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in a post you can access here.

“Commandments monument stirs emotions on GR visit”: This article appears today in The Grand Rapids Press.

“Agence France Presse Sues Google Over News Site”: Reuters provides this report.

Constitutional limits on federal power found in the Commerce Clause lead the Eleventh Circuit to overturn another child pornography conviction: Today’s decision is particularly noteworthy because it arises on plain error review.

House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property puts itself in the eye of the Vornado: In its 2002 ruling in in Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit only has jurisdiction over appeals in which the plaintiff’s well–pleaded complaint alleges a patent law claim. Thus, where a plaintiff’s complaint contains no patent law claim but the defendant’s answer asserts a patent law counterclaim, an appeal of a trial court’s patent law ruling would properly be heard by a regional U.S. Court of Appeals instead of the Federal Circuit. Because one major purpose for having the Federal Circuit was to advance uniformity in patent law, many in Congress are interested in overturning the result in Vornado.

Indeed, this week, the House Judiciary Committee‘s Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property held hearings with an eye toward accomplishing that very result. The blog “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” offers two posts about the hearings: “Congress Discusses Which Court Should Hear Patent Cases” and “Patent Attorneys Testify to Consistency of Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.”

In September 2003, Judge William Curtis Bryson of the Federal Circuit participated in this blog’s “20 questions for the appellate judge” feature. I asked him: “as a matter of policy, would you favor an amendment by Congress to the relevant jurisdictional statutes to give the Federal Circuit exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all patent claims, whether asserted by the plaintiff or defendant?”

And Judge Bryson answered:

It is too soon to tell whether the Vornado case will introduce a significant amount of non-uniformity into patent law because of the fact that regional circuits will now be deciding some patent issues. My guess is that the effect will be marginal and that the regional circuits, which have been out of the patent business for the past 20 years, will not be leaping to seize the opportunity to create circuit splits with us. A congressional fix would have the useful effect of returning us to where we were before Vornado, and it is difficult for me to see any strong policy reasons against making that change.

You can access Judge Bryson’s complete interview at this link.

“Life of Privilege: Why the law protects some private relationships and not others.” Rod Smolla has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

The AP is reporting: The latest news from Florida is “Brain-Damaged Woman’s Feeding Tube Removed.” And Hope Yen has a report headlined “Experts: Congress Shaky on Schiavo Actions.”

“Openly Rational: A straight, Republican judge rules for the home team.” This article about the recent San Francisco Superior Court same-sex marriage ruling appears in the current issue of LA Weekly.

“Rehnquist May Return to Court Soon”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Judges Lack Protection Politicians Get” and “Atlanta Police Admit Errors After Shooting.”

“State Supreme Court rules on damages in crane collapse; Decision that tossed $94 million award overturned, sent back to appeals court”: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel provides this news update.

“Rehnquist May Return to Bench, Supreme Court Spokeswoman Says”: Bloomberg News provides this report. And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Chief Justice: on the bench Monday?”

And in other news from Canada: The Toronto Globe and Mail today also contains an article headlined “Don’t dither on selection process, judge warns PM.”

The article begins, “Mr. Justice Jack Major intends to retire from the Supreme Court of Canada this fall and has warned that Prime Minister Paul Martin must either redesign a judicial selection process quickly or risk being accused of ‘dithering.'”

Lastly, in other big news from Canada’s highest court, “Quebec Margarine Can’t Masquerade as Butter, Canada Court Rules,” Bloomberg News reports. And CBC News offers a report headlined “Keep the lid on yellow margarine: Supreme Court.”

“Death-penalty debate grips China after wrongful execution”: This article appears today on the front page of The Toronto Globe and Mail.

“Easy Rider“: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today issued an opinion that begins:

This case involves a dormant Commerce Clause challenge to a unique provision in Virginia’s motorcycle dealer franchise law. The provision allows any existing franchised dealer in Virginia to protest the establishment of a new dealership for the same brand anywhere in the Commonwealth. The district court rejected the challenge, concluding that the statute neither discriminates against, nor imposes a cognizable burden upon, interstate commerce. We conclude, however, that the statute’s provision for statewide protest rights unduly burdens interstate commerce in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause. The judgment is therefore reversed.

You can access the opinion at this link.

“Florida Judge Lifts Stay Blocking Feeding Tube Removal”: Reuters provides this update. And The AP now reports that “Judge OKs Removal of Schiavo Feeding Tube.”

“Issues of Identity: Harvard should require proof from Native American applicants.” This editorial appears today in The Harvard Crimson. In response, two members of that publication’s editorial board who disagree have an op-ed entitled “The Identity Threat: Requiring proof of ethnicity from any ethnic group is invasive and insulting.”

Gun free high school yearbook zone: The Associated Press offers an article headlined “N.H. Federal Judge Rules Against Gun Photo” that begins, “A high school senior’s bid to hold a shotgun in his yearbook portrait was rejected Thursday by a federal judge.” You can view the photo at issue by clicking here. And yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire can be accessed at this link.

In earlier coverage, last week The Union Leader of Manchester, New Hampshire reported that “Judge tells student he’s unlikely to win yearbook case.”

BREAKING NEWS — “Judge: Keep Schiavo feeding tube in place.” The Associated Press has just issued a report that begins, “A state judge on Friday temporarily blocked the removal of the feeding tube for severely brain-damaged Terri Schiavo as legal wrangling continued over efforts by congressional Republicans to keep her alive.”

The New York Times neglects to offer its own coverage of yesterday’s Second Circuit oral argument in the appeal from Martha Stewart’s conviction: Instead, the newspaper appears to have opted for wire service coverage.

But, other newspapers found covering the oral argument worthwhile. The Washington Post reports today that “Stewart Wants to Be Resentenced; Lawyers Argue Impact Of High Court Ruling.”

Newsday today contains an article headlined “Questions about witness perjury; Appeals panel asks why judge in Martha’s trial never set hearing on veracity of expert witness Larry Stewart.”

The Journal News of Westchester, New York reports that “Stewart’s lawyer seeking new trial, sentence.”

The New York Daily News reports that “Martha could lose bracelet.”

And The New York Post offers an article headlined “Martha’s Munchies.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Rehnquist Still Weighing Whether to Return” and “Martha Stewart Judge May Resentence Her.”

Sixth Circuit rejects sentencing enhancement for “unduly influencing” a minor child to engage in sexual activity where the supposed victim is in fact an undercover law enforcement officer: In so deciding, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected interpretations of the sentencing provision that the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits have adopted. You can access today’s ruling at this link.

New York State intermediate appellate court upholds denial of “surviving spouse” workers’ compensation benefits to long-time same-sex domestic partner of deceased American Airlines flight attendant: You can access yesterday’s ruling of the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department at this link.

“Filibuster Precedent? Democrats Point to ’68 and Fortas; But GOP Senators Cite Differences in Current Effort to Bar Votes on Judges.” This article appears today in The Washington Post.

And at Human Events Online, Robert B. Bluey reports that “Stage Is Set for ‘Nuclear’ Showdown.”

“Judge Orders Suspended Attorney To Withdraw From Age Bias Case”: Today in The Legal Intelligencer, Shannon P. Duffy has an article (paid subscription required) that begins:

Despite having his license suspended by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, attorney Frank J. Marcone has for years enjoyed the right to continue practicing in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania federal court.

But now one judge on that court has ruled that Marcone cannot handle any cases before him because he is not currently licensed in any state and therefore is not subject to continuing legal education requirements or attorney discipline, and does not make payments to the Pennsylvania Lawyers Fund for Client Security.

I have uploaded a copy of Wednesday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this link.

Back in August 2004, I had this lengthy post about a ruling from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in an appeal involving this very same attorney and his efforts to continue practicing in Philadelphia’s federal district court.

Update: law.com has now made the article mentioned at the outset of this post freely available at this link.

Blogads: In cooperation with legalaffairs.org, which hosts “How Appealing,” I’m so very pleased to announce that my blog has been approved to begin hosting advertisements placed through the Blogads service.

Such ads will appear on the upper right-hand column of this page, just below the maroon box that provides links to content found elsewhere on the Legal Affairs web site.

To get the ball rolling, we are offering an introductory rate on one-week ads of just $100, a sixty percent discount from the regular $250 rate that will apply to one-week ads after this introductory offer expires. To consider purchasing a Blogad on “How Appealing,” simply click here.

More information about Blogads can be found in “A Mini-Interview With Henry Copeland From Blogads” and at the service’s web site.

Can an ad on “How Appealing” generate business revenue? Last year, my law firm, as a result of having its icon featured on the upper right-hand corner of this blog, generated nearly $100,000 worth of new client business.

D.C. Circuit rules that a flight from Denver to Chicago qualifies as “international transportation” within the meaning of the Warsaw Convention: Hey, I don’t invent these decisions; I just report on them. You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.