“Diaz needs formal OK to restart work on Supreme Court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Justice Oliver Diaz Jr. has spent almost as much time suspended from his job on the Mississippi Supreme Court as he spent actively participating in deciding cases.”
And The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article headlined “Diaz acquittal fuels election questions” and an editorial entitled “Diaz: Let Supreme Court justice resume work.”
“Judicial nuclear option?” Columnist Robert Novak has this essay today at Townhall.com.
“The Harvard Bloggership Conference in a Nutshell”: Dan Solove has this post at “Concurring Opinions.”
Timothy K. Armstrong, at his eponymous blog, provides even more detail on the presentations (as did Larry Solum at his “Legal Theory Blog”; begin here and scroll down).
And Christine Hurt, at “Conglomerate,” offers photos.
“State to investigate all 7 justices; Remarks by Sen. Dean Johnson have led to a Standards Board probe”: The Minneapolis Star Tribune today contains an article that begins, “For what may be the first time in its 40-year history, the state Board on Judicial Standards has opened investigative files on all seven Minnesota Supreme Court justices, the result of a complaint that alleges that one or more of them may have had improper conversations with a legislator regarding Minnesota’s marriage laws.”
“Data Show How Patriot Act Used; The Justice Department for the first time reports on 9,254 FBI subpoenas for monitoring citizens; Some surveillance in the U.S. has been rising”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.
“Cameras in the High Court”: These three letters to the editor appear today in The Washington Post.
The New York Times is reporting: In Sunday’s newspaper, Adam Liptak will have an article headlined “In Leak Cases, New Pressure on Journalists.”
Tomorrow’s newspaper will also contain an article headlined “Abuse Concerns Stymie Releases From Guantanamo.”
Meanwhile, today’s newspaper reports that “Band of Activists in Europe Holds the Line in the Case Against Microsoft.”
“Juror Looks Up Word and Finds Trouble; Moussaoui Judge Decides Research at Home Wasn’t Intentional Violation of Order”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.
And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports today that “Jurors recess in penalty trial; Judge warns against research; Moussaoui fate still undecided.”
“Judge denies Muhammad’s request for trial delay”: The Baltimore Sun today contains an article that begins, “Sporting a new close-cropped haircut in his last court appearance before his six-count murder trial starts here Monday, convicted sniper John Allen Muhammad asked a Montgomery County judge yesterday first to delay, then to move, the trial.”
And The Washington Post today contains an article headlined “Muhammad’s Competency Challenged.”
“Case Turns Toward Law Firm”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “A six-year investigation into whether lawyers at the influential securities class-action law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman used illegal tactics took a significant turn yesterday after a retired real estate mortgage broker agreed to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigation.”
And The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that “Man admits taking kickbacks in shareholder suits.”
“Schiltz confirmed as federal judge”: Thursday’s edition of The Minneapolis Star Tribune contained this excellent news. My earlier coverage of this judicial nomination appears here and here.
“Bench a hot seat; inquiry ordered; House panel to investigate.” The Topeka Capital-Journal today contains an article that begins, “House Speaker Doug Mays authorized Friday a bipartisan House committee to investigate possible unethical communications between the Legislature and the Kansas Supreme Court about a school finance lawsuit against the state.” The newspaper also provides “Mays’ statement ordering investigation.”
In other coverage, The Wichita Eagle reports today that “House to probe court discussions.”
The Kansas City Star reports that “House plans inquiry into lunch; Special committee may be granted subpoena powers.”
And The Lawrence Journal-World reports that “House speaker plans Nuss inquiry.”
“Recall backers win legal point”: The San Gabriel Valley Tribune today contains an article that begins, “The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ordered the withdrawal of a three-judge panel decision that held recall petitions must be circulated in multiple languages, according to a court document.” My earlier coverage appears here and here.
Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Watchdog Group Singles Out ‘Junketing Judges.’” Meanwhile, in related news, The Associated Press reports that “2 Lawmakers Call for Judiciary Watchdog.”
And the brand new installment of my “On Appeal” column is headlined “Considering a Likely Appeal in the Moussaoui Case.” I thank the Moussaoui jury for failing to render a verdict late this afternoon, which would likely have triggered a panicked last-minute rewrite of my essay.
“Court of Appeals to Hold Special Sitting at University of Washington”: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this news release today.
“Interesting Development in Padilla v. Lever Case”: Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law” blog on the Ninth Circuit‘s en banc order issued today that I earlier noted here. An attorney connected with the case advises me via email that the case remains scheduled for an en banc oral argument before a fifteen-judge panel on June 22, 2006.
“Starr Mounts Challenge to Sarbanes-Oxley”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A constitutional challenge by conservatives to the law that reshaped corporate governance after a wave of business scandals likely will end up before the Supreme Court, attorney Kenneth Starr says.”
“Phone Home: Courts must enforce the consular rights of foreign nationals.” Law Professor Carlos M. Vázquez has this essay in the current issue of Legal Times.
Back home from Cambridge, Massachusetts: Today marked my third speaking engagement at the Harvard Law School, and my fourth speaking engagement in the Boston area, since I began this blog in May 2002. Today’s event was great fun, and it was a pleasure to finally meet in person so many law professor bloggers whose work I have long admired from a distance. At some point later this weekend, I may offer further thoughts on the event and the bloggers I had the pleasure of meeting.
In this post at his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Doug Berman links to others who were live-blogging, in part or in full, today’s event.
“The issue before us is whether a parent who is also an attorney can receive attorneys’ fees for the representation of his child in a suit brought under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act”: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit answers “no” in a ruling that you can access here.
“Judge postpones hearing on using lethal injections; Killer’s execution put on hold until at least September”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle. Earlier today, I collected additional news coverage at this link.
Municipal ordinance requiring door-to-door canvassers who plan to “hand pamphlets or other written material” to residents or discuss with them “issues of public or religious interest” to first register with the police department violates the First Amendment: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued this decision today.
“We hold that the District Court erred in concluding that the state owes an affirmative due process duty of care to residents of a state institution who are free to leave state custody.” A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued this opinion today.
The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Court Rules New York Can Sue Countries” and “Judge Won’t Restrict Padilla’s Lawyers.”
In the election law case of Padilla v. Lever, the en banc Ninth Circuit has voted to withdraw the opinion of the three-judge panel: You can access today’s order at this link. Today’s order comes eight days after the court announced that it had granted rehearing en banc in the case. It is unclear, at least to me, whether this marks the conclusion of the Ninth Circuit’s involvement in the case.
“Feinstein Faces Long Odds in Fight to Keep Seat for a Californian”: Lawrence Hurley has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.
“We had a great time!” You can access here a post from one of the people who attended last night’s meet-the-law-bloggers gathering.
“[T]his case presents the limited question of whether Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of ‘sex’ includes a termination on the basis of an employee’s admitted, consensual sexual conduct with a supervisor.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued this decision today.
“Moussaoui Jurors Told to Follow Guidelines”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The judge in Zacarias Moussaoui’s death penalty trial admonished jurors Friday to avoid looking up words in the dictionary after learning that one went on the Internet to see what ‘aggravating’ means.”
“Moussaoui Jury Faces Dozens of Questions”: The Associated Press provides this report.
“CRC Report Says Increased Amount of ‘Junkets for Judges'”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this report.
Update: The web site of Community Rights Counsel provides a news release entitled “Despite Years of Growing Outrage, Corporate Junkets for Judges Increase by 60%.”
“Jury clears Diaz; Justice found not guilty in tax trial”: This article appears today in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi.
On the agenda: Today I’ll be appearing with an impressive group of other law bloggers at Harvard Law School at an event titled “Bloggership: How Blogs Are Transforming Legal Scholarship.” The event is free and open to the public, and audio of the event will be streamed live online (details available via this link).
And at lunchtime today, I hope to visit Ed Whelan’s event titled “The Next Supreme Court Vacancy: Lessons from the Roberts and Alito Confirmation Processes,” which is taking place just down the road from my event.
Last night I met for the first time many of the people participating in today’s conference, and it was wonderful to finally meet in person various law professor bloggers whose work I have greatly admired from a distance. At some point, photos from the event will begin to appear online. Law Professor Christine Hurt (who blogs here) at last night’s dinner took a photo of me with Law Professor Charles R. Nesson (who blogs here).
The location where today’s program will take place supposedly has internet access, so regular postings should appear here throughout the day.
In news from Kansas: The Topeka Capital-Journal today contains articles headlined “Mays expected to seek inquiry into Nuss” and “Topekan files complaint against judge.”
The Kansas City Star reports today that “Lunch meeting snarls school debate; Lawmakers seek formal inquiry.”
And The Associated Press reports that “Nuss controversy leads to citizen’s inquiry about McFarland.”
“Death row inmate gets time for appeal”: The Kansas City Star today contains an article that begins, “Condemned Missouri inmate Michael A. Taylor will have an additional 60 days to complete his appeals on the state’s lethal injection procedures, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.”
And The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports today that “Appeals court orders new hearing in KC on execution by injection.”
