“U.S. Resumes Military Trials At Guantanamo”: Jess Bravin, reporting from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will have this article (pass-through link) Wednesday in The Wall Street Journal.
According to the article’s second paragraph, “Outside the hearing room, the chief military prosecutor took the unusual step of upbraiding Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer for a question he asked at last week’s oral argument, suggesting that the justice didn’t appreciate the gravity of threats facing the U.S. or the sacrifices of military personnel.”
Available online from National Public Radio: Today’s broadcast of “Talk of the Nation” contained a segment entitled “High Court Stays Out of Padilla Case” featuring David G. Savage.
And this evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained a segment entitled “Ga. Illegal Hires Case Pends in Supreme Court.”
RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
“High Court Cases Put International Law in the Spotlight; Justices examine Geneva and Vienna conventions in two critical cases”: law.com’s Marcia Coyle provides this report.
“14 Dogs Is 10 Too Many, Supreme Court Says”: Lynne Tuohy has this article today in The Hartford Courant. Yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Connecticut consists of a majority opinion and a concurring opinion.
“Senate confirms New Jersey lawyer to appeals court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The U.S. Senate on Tuesday confirmed President Bush’s nomination of a New Jersey lawyer to the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”
Tea and crackers: Demonstrating that his mastery of language is not limited to obscure English, today First Circuit Judge Bruce M. Selya, on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel, issued a decision in a case from Puerto Rico affirming a trademark injunction that prohibited the defendant from “advertising, distributing, or selling cookies or crackers in Puerto Rico under the trade name ‘Ricas.'”
Meanwhile, a reader emails to complain that I have thus far overlooked a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today: “I thought you might be interested in this Second Circuit opinion released today. If for no other reason, how often do federal courts use the term ‘tea-bagging’?? As you’ll see, the case involves a section 1983 employment retaliation action rooted in a high school football hazing incident.”
“Pay-Raise-Related Cases Argued Before State Supreme Court”: The Legal Intelligencer provides a news update (free access) that begins, “The wake of last year’s pay raise affair washed over Philadelphia today in the form of a two-and-half-hour oral argument session before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court involving three closely related cases.”
And The Philadelphia Inquirer provides a news update headlined “Pa. Supreme Court hears arguments in pay raise cases.”
Happy first half-birthday to “Concurring Opinions“: The celebration begins here. For those keeping track, in one month and two days from now, “How Appealing” will celebrate its eighth half-birthday.
“Supreme Court Pushes Back on Televised Proceedings; Annual budget hearing turns into a platform for Justices Kennedy and Thomas to vent on issues of interest to the high court”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update. A bit earlier today, I linked here to archived online video of this morning’s hearing.
“Jurors Permit Death Penalty for Moussaoui”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.
The Washington Post reports today that “Moussaoui Found Eligible for Death; In Next Phase of Trial, Federal Jury to Decide Whether 9/11 Conspirator Should Be Executed.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that “Terrorist a Step Closer to Death; Jurors will decide if Moussaoui is to be executed; Defense may argue he is mentally ill.”
The Sacramento Bee reports that “Moussaoui jurors find him eligible for death penalty; ‘God curse you all!’ says the admitted 9/11 conspirator.”
The Richmond Times-Dispatch contains an article headlined “Jury: Moussaoui is eligible to get death penalty; Next comes testimony from Sept. 11 survivors and victims’ families.”
USA Today reports that “Jury moves Moussaoui closer to death; 9/11 convict eligible for execution; next phase to determine sentence.”
The Washington Times reports that “Death OK’d for Moussaoui.”
And today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition” contained segments entitled “Moussaoui Defiant in Face Death Penalty Ruling” and “The Legal View of the Moussaoui Sentencing Trial” (RealPlayer required).
“North Platte man seeks judges’ ouster”: This past Saturday’s edition of The Lincoln Journal Star contained an article that begins, “A North Platte man is attempting to organize committees to campaign against the retention of two Nebraska Supreme Court judges in the November election.”
“Supreme Court Still Says No to Cameras”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.
“House Appropriations Subcmte. Hearing on the Supreme Court”: C-SPAN has archived at this link (RealPlayer required) the video of this morning’s congressional hearing (which I previewed here) at which Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas testified.
Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner issues a very interesting decision examining the “ministerial exception” to federal jurisdiction: Today’s ruling, on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel, can be accessed here.
In today’s ruling, the Seventh Circuit condemns as “unsound” the Second Circuit‘s recent ruling, by a divided three-judge panel (the dissenting opinion is here), suggesting that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 may preclude a minister’s federal age discrimination claim against his church, thereby eliminating any need for the Second Circuit to consider whether to adopt a “ministerial exception” to the ADEA. My earlier coverage of that Second Circuit ruling can be accessed here.
“With the walls of our homes breached by the Internet, our next best defense is the law.” So writes Ninth Circuit Judge Stephen S. Trott, at the outset of his lengthy dissent today from a three-judge panel’s ruling that a district court erred in admitting into evidence stories extracted from the defendant’s PDA about a father’s having sex with his young daughter and the daughter’s enjoyment of the experience. The defendant-appellant was convicted of traveling across state lines with intent to engage in a sexual act with a minor and using an interstate facility to attempt to persuade a minor to engage in sex. Today’s decision, by a 2-1 vote, necessitates a new trial of the case.
“Moussaoui: the first verdict, and the next phase.” Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.” My Moussaoui mainstream media press coverage round-up is forthcoming.
Eighth Circuit affirms decision holding Arkansas school district in contempt for violating injunction that prohibits orchestrating or supervising prayers at school graduation or baccalaureate ceremonies: You can access today’s per curiam decision at this link.
“Ruling on petitions could crimp direct democracy”: Today in The Sacramento Bee, columnist Daniel Weintraub has an op-ed that begins, “California’s system of direct democracy could be threatened by a recent federal court decision concluding that the federal Voting Rights Act requires petitions circulated by private citizens to be translated into foreign languages.” (Via Rick Hasen’s “Election Law” blog).
“Ahenakew appeals hate conviction; Conversation with reporter was private: lawyer.” The Saskatoon StarPhoenix today contains an article that begins, “Society is moving down a slippery slope towards a ‘tattle-tale police state’ in which private speech no longer exists, claims the lawyer representing disgraced Indian leader David Ahenakew.”
In other coverage, CBC News reports that “Ahenakew lawyer says controversial conversation was private.” And CTV.ca reports that “Ahenakew begins appeal for hate conviction.”
“British Lawyers Build Case Against Wigs; Traditionalists Defend Headpieces, but Others Call Them Silly Relics; Plus, They Itch”: This article appears today in The Washington Post (via “Opinio Juris“). In earlier coverage, The Solomon Star based in Honiara, Solomon Islands, last month had an article headlined “Wig shortage.”
In news from Pennsylvania: The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Court to hear pay-raise lawsuits” that begins, “It’s the state Supreme Court’s turn to pass judgment on the pay raises state legislators voted for themselves, judges and senior executive-branch officials, and later repealed. The court will hear oral arguments in three pay-raise lawsuits in Philadelphia today, in the midst of a primary election season dominated by the topic.”
And The Allentown Morning Call today contains an editorial entitled “Pay-raise questions in state, federal courts may shed light on Harrisburg integrity.”
“Enron Defense Team Begins to Call Witnesses”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.
The New York Times today contains articles headlined “In Enron Trial, a Calculated Risk” and “A Lead Lawyer’s Illness Hinders Defense Team as It Starts to Present Its Case.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that “Enron Defense Takes Aim at Witnesses; An ex-employee testifies that her boss, who pleaded guilty, told her he was really innocent.”
Mary Flood of The Houston Chronicle reports that “Defense witness charges perjury; Ex-top aide says Mark Koenig told her he was innocent when he pleaded guilty.” And an article reports that “Lay’s lawyer going back to hospital for further heart tests; Surgery to check stent implanted in artery last month.”
“Life ain’t a cabaret, judge rules”: The New York Daily News today contains an article that begins, “Dancing may be fun – but it’s not protected by the Constitution, a judge ruled yesterday.” Yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of New York can be accessed here.
Congratulations to newly-confirmed Third Circuit Judge Michael A. Chagares: This morning’s just-concluded confirmation vote in the U.S. Senate was 98-0.
“Thorny legal issues in case of HIV in marriage; State’s top court to weigh privacy right, liability for harm”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.
“Transgender person sues, alleging job harassment”: This article appears today in The Sacramento Bee.
Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas are scheduled to testify this morning before the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, The Judiciary, District of Columbia of the Committee on Appropriations of the U.S. House of Representatives: C-SPAN plans to televise the hearing live at 10 a.m. eastern time. You can access C-SPAN online using either RealPlayer or Windows Media Player.
“Killer’s Retardation Claim Is Denied; Riverside County judge upholds death sentence of a man who shot a boy in 1984; His case now goes to state’s high court”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.
And The Press-Enterprise reports today that “Attempt to overturn death sentences fails; The judge didn’t believe witnesses that Kelly was retarded; He killed three in the 1980s.”
“Judge strikes down Mich. law on ultraviolent video games; Federal jurist says Constitution protects games and the regulation may not be implemented”: This article appears today in The Detroit News.
And The Detroit Free Press today contains an article headlined “Judge: Ban on violent video games is illegal; Free speech cited; state may appeal.”
I have posted online at this link a copy of last Friday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
“Prisoners’ side struggles in reading-material case”: Tony Mauro had this news analysis last week at the First Amendment Center.
“O’Connor to Join Foundation Board”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Sandra Day O’Connor, who retired from the Supreme Court in January, will join the board of the Rockefeller Foundation in June, the foundation, based in New York, announced yesterday.”
“Justices Decline Terror Case of a U.S. Citizen”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times. And a related editorial is entitled “The High Court Punts.”
Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “High Court Declines to Take Up ‘Dirty Bomber’ Case; Left open is whether the president can claim war powers to detain suspects without a trial.”
In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Supreme Court rebuffs appeal by Padilla.”
Newsday reports that “Detainee’s new appeal is rejected; Supreme Court will not hear case of Jose Padilla, citizen held as ‘enemy combatant’ and later indicted.”
The Washington Times reports that “‘Enemy combatant’ category undecided.”
The Toronto Globe and Mail reports that “U.S. court rejects appeal by ‘enemy combatant’; Justices sidestep citizen’s challenge to Bush war powers.”
And The Washington Post contains an editorial entitled “Permission to Back Down; The Supreme Court leaves a showdown over military detentions for another day.”
