Meanwhile, back in New Jersey: Today in The Bergen Record, Amy Klein reports that “Chagares nominated to fill judgeship vacated by Chertoff.”
The Newark Star-Ledger reports today that “Stalemate broken on U.S. judges for Jersey; White House agrees to fill vacancies in Trenton, Camden and Newark.”
Men may be from Mars, and women from Venus, but The Asbury Park Press reports today that “Bush nominates a Neptune native for trial-court judgeship; She is currently a U.S. Magistrate.”
And The Philadelphia Inquirer reports today that “Prosecutor Bumb picked for U.S. bench; The assistant U.S. attorney’s big wins include Milton Milan’s conviction.”
“Democrats Split Over Filibuster On Alito”: This front page article will appear Friday in The Washington Post.
“BlackBerry outage? Oh, the horror.” Yesterday’s issue of The Los Angeles Times contained this article.
“Key Enron trial nears, but climate has changed”: This article will appear Friday in The Christian Science Monitor.
“Senate GOP Seeks to Force Vote on Alito”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.
And Thomas Ferraro of Reuters reports that “Two more Senate Democrats back Alito.”
If a filibuster is underway, Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) says that he supports it.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) files cloture motion to close debate on the nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr. to the Supreme Court of the United States: The cloture vote will occur at 4:30 p.m. on Monday of next week, and the up-or-down vote on the nomination will occur at 11 a.m. on Tuesday of next week if cloture is successfully invoked on Monday.
“Flight attendants win case against Air Canada”: The Toronto Globe and Mail provides a news update that begins, “The Supreme Court of Canada ruled Tuesday that Air Canada’s flight attendants can compare their pay with that of pilots and ground crews to determine if they are being discriminated against because of gender.” You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada at this link.
“Prochoice Puritans”: Katha Pollitt will have this essay in the February 13, 2006 issue of The Nation.
“Nevada Court Rules Google Cache is Fair Use; Important Milestone for Digital Copyright Law”: The Electronic Frontier Foundation provides this report on a ruling that the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada issued last week.
In 9/11-related perjury prosecution against Osama Awadallah arising from testimony he gave under oath to a federal grand jury, Second Circuit affirms trial court’s prohibition on asking grand jurors to testify concerning their subjective impressions of the defendant’s demeanor and appearance: You can access today’s ruling at this link. The ruling is a setback to federal prosecutors, who took the appeal seeking to overturn the trial court’s pretrial order limiting the type of questions that could be put to grand jurors who will be called as witnesses for the prosecution at trial. Some additional background about the case can be accessed here.
“ID check at US airports not unconstitutional: court.” Reuters provides this report. My coverage is here.
“Sen. Kerry calls for filibuster of Alito; Unclear if Massachusetts Democrat has votes needed to block nominee”: CNN.com provides this report.
Relatedly, today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day” included a segment entitled “Democrats, GOP Debate Alito Nomination in Senate” (RealPlayer required).
“Lieberman Against Alito Confirmation”: The Hartford Courant provides this news update.
“Decision on RIM expected next month”: This article appears today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.
And earlier this week, The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported that “Judge here to resolve patent case; U.S. Supreme Court won’t intervene in BlackBerry dispute.”
“Euthanize Federal Mission Creep: Oregon’s assisted suicide law saved by Supreme Court’s liberal justices.” Shikha Dalmia has this essay online today at Reason.
“Wire Trap: What if wiretapping works?” Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner will have this essay in the February 6, 2006 issue of The New Republic.
“We remain somewhat troubled that, in contrast to most statutory construction cases where we are usually asked to construe the meaning of an ambiguous phrase or word, we are here faced with the task of striking a word passed on by both Houses of Congress and approved by the President, and replacing it with a word of the exact opposite meaning.” A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today issued an interesting order (taking the form of an opinion) addressing the procedure for perfecting an appeal under the recently enacted Class Action Fairness Act of 2005.
Finding the statutory language ambiguous, the Ninth Circuit today rules that the proper procedure for requesting appellate review under CAFA is the procedure set forth in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 5, titled “Appeal by Permission.”
Even more interesting, however, is the court’s discussion of the timing provision contained in the federal statute authorizing appellate review. That statute provides:
Section 1447 shall apply to any removal of a case under this section, except that notwithstanding section 1447(d), a court of appeals may accept an appeal from an order of a district court granting or denying a motion to remand a class action to the State court from which it was removed if application is made to the court of appeals not less than 7 days after entry of the order.
As today’s order explains, “the statute as written creates a waiting period of seven days before which an appeal is too early, with no upper limit to when an appeal ultimately may be filed.”
With respect to the statute’s express timing provision, today’s order states: “there is no apparent logical reason for the choice of the word ‘less’ in the statute, use of the word ‘less’ is, in fact, illogical and contrary to the stated purpose of the provision, and the statute should therefore be read to require that an application to appeal under §1453(c)(1) must be filed–in accordance with the requirements of FRAP 5–not more than 7 days after the district court’s order.”
U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) announces he will vote to confirm Samuel A. Alito, Jr.: Just announced on the floor of the U.S. Senate. That brings to three the number of Democratic Senators who have announced that they will vote to confirm.
In news coverage, Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press reports that “More Democrats Get Behind Alito Nomination.”
“6th Circuit Court judge dies at 49; ‘Very respected’ jurist from Grosse Pointe Woods spent her life building law career”: The Detroit News provides an obituary that begins, “U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Susan Bieke Neilson, whose appointment to the 6th Circuit Court bench was confirmed by the Senate in October, died Wednesday night of pulmonary failure in Harper Hospital in Detroit.”
Judge Neilson joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on November 9, 2005. On October 27, 2005, as I then noted here, the U.S. Senate confirmed her to the Sixth Circuit by a vote of 97-0.
Unanimous three-judge Ninth Circuit panel rejects constitutional challenge to federal government’s civilian airline passenger identification policy: You can access today’s ruling in Gilmore v. Gonzales at this link. Additional details about the case can be accessed here.
“Disney Holders Ask Court to Reverse Pay Ruling”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “A lawyer representing Walt Disney Co. shareholders on Wednesday asked Delaware’s high court to reverse a ruling that found the company’s directors did not breach their duty when awarding former President Michael Ovitz a $130 million severance package.”
And The New York Times reports today that “Disney Shareholders Ask Court to Reverse Ovitz Pay Decision.”
Two Democrats, and counting: U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) today has issued a press release titled “Johnson to Vote for Alito.”
In news coverage, Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Democatic Sen. Johnson to Back Alito.”
“Alito Confirmation Looms, But Who Cares, Really? Alito Unfoldings Provoke a Dull Response.” Lawrence Hurley has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.
“More Fun With Immigration Judges”: Steve Vladeck has this post today at “PrawfsBlawg.”
“The Outer Shell: The hollowing out of Roe v. Wade.” Law Professor Dawn Johnsen has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
Justice for sale: Although efforts to keep Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court notwithstanding her long-awaited retirement wishes (but see The Onion’s coverage) appear unlikely to succeed, you can make her a permanent part of your bobblehead U.S. Supreme Court thanks to two auctions currently underway at eBay. This auction is scheduled to end first, while this auction is scheduled to end second.
“Killer’s execution stayed in challenge to lethal injection; One or possibly two Florida executions are on hold while the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether a convict can challenge lethal injection”: This article appears today in The Miami Herald, along with an article headlined “An unlikely champion in execution fight; A UM anesthesiologist finds himself in the midst of the controversy over whether lethal injections cause pain.”
The St. Petersburg Times reports today that “Death method may go on trial; Execution of a Florida killer is stayed to judge civil rights issues, but lethal injections could be next.”
The Orlando Sentinel reports that “Top court halts killer’s execution; The victory by a death-row inmate in Florida could temporarily quash all lethal injections in the country.”
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports that “U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether Florida’s executions are ‘cruel and unusual.’”
The Pensacola News Journal reports that “Killer spared through April.”
The Gainesville Sun reports that “Blocked execution may lead to case vs. method.”
And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Florida case may postpone execution; High Court questions use of lethal injection.”
Day two of debate will soon begin on the floor of the U.S. Senate on whether to confirm Samuel A. Alito, Jr. to the Supreme Court of the United States: Today’s scheduled start time is 9:45 a.m. You can view the proceedings live, online via C-SPAN2 (RealPlayer required).
“Skilling, Lay seek a timeout; They want case stopped so they can ask appeals court for venue change”: Mary Flood of The Houston Chronicle has this article today. And in related coverage, “The media may not be rock stars, but this is their big gig.”
“Fame offers no immunity to Survivor guilty of tax evasion; Deemed a flight risk, Richard Hatch, the first winner on the reality TV show, is being held at the Wyatt Detention Facility in Central Falls pending sentencing April 28”: This article appears today in The Providence (R.I.) Journal.
“Things are far from clear”: Today in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Linda P. Campbell has an op-ed that begins, “If you purchased invisible or transparent tape — you could be a winner!”
“Alito Debate Focuses on Executive Power; In Senate discussions on the nominee, Bush’s spy program and the Patriot Act are top issues”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.
The Washington Times reports today that “Parties shore up votes on Alito.” And David Limbaugh has an op-ed entitled “Unacceptably mainstream?”
The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reports that “Senate debate on Alito slides into a partisan war of words; Democrats and GOP keep trading charges of distortion, smears.”
The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “Allen warns against Alito filibuster.”
The Providence (R.I.) Journal reports that “Reed sees no friend to individual rights in Alito; will vote no; Reed joins a Democratic chorus against the Supreme Court nominee.”
The Huntsville Times reports that “Sessions expects vote by Friday.”
The Trenton Times reports that “Alito’s achievement a source of hometown and ethnic pride.”
The Arkansas News Bureau reports that “More Alito ads target Arkansas senators.”
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “Kean takes war with Menendez to Alito’s turf.”
And The Ithacan reports that “Alito endorsement stirs abortion debate.”
In commentary, The Wall Street Journal today contains an editorial entitled “The Roberts-Alito Court: Thank you, Ted Kennedy and Ralph Neas.”
And columnist Robert Novak has an essay entitled “What price Alito?”
“Salazar: Thomas an ‘abomination’; High court justice no Thurgood Marshall, Colo. senator says.” This article appears today in The Rocky Mountain News.
“Sex Overseas May Fall Under U.S. Jurisdiction”: Josh Gerstein has this article today in The New York Sun.
And today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Law upheld on child sex abroad.”
“Words, Deeds on Spying Differed; Even as warrantless U.S. eavesdropping was being conducted, the White House opposed easing rules on the issue in 2002 to avoid public debate”: Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has an article that begins, “Four years ago, top Bush administration lawyers told Congress they opposed lowering the legal standard for intercepting the phone calls of foreigners who were in the United States, even while the administration had secretly adopted a lower standard on its own.”
