“Dems aiming to succeed Resnick cite views similar to Ohio justice”: The Toledo Blade today contains an article that begins, “The two Democrats seeking to succeed retiring Justice Alice Robie Resnick on the state Supreme Court argue Ohio cannot afford to have its high court solely in the hands of Republicans for the first time in history.”

“Analysis: Bush v. Gore lives.” Today at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has this post about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued on Friday.

My initial post about that ruling is here, and yesterday I collected press coverage of the ruling at this link.

“Big battle brews in small Ga. town; Supreme Court to consider suit over immigrants”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“O’Connor speaks out on issues”: Today’s issue of The Oklahoman contains this article reporting on the newspaper’s interview yesterday with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. The newspaper has also posted online audio files from the interview titled “Early job search“; “The judiciary“; “Growing up on the ranch“; and “Public schools.”

In other coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Newly Retired Justice Visits Oklahoma For Cowboy Event.”

“High Court to Hear Lethal Injection Case”: The Associated Press provides this report.

In Monday’s edition of The Christian Science Monitor: Warren Richey will have an article headlined “Does Kansas tilt capital cases? US Supreme court is set to rehear a Kansas case that tests constitutional requirements in death-penalty sentencing.”

Tomorrow’s newspaper will also contain an article headlined “In police lineups, is the method the suspect?”

Philadelphia Phillies 4, Florida Marlins 2: This afternoon, my son and I had the pleasure of attending another Phillies victory. Last year’s Rookie of the Year, Ryan Howard, hit two home runs for the Phils, and his first of the game now stands as the longest homer ever hit at Citizens Bank Park. The blast was measured at 496 feet, and it cleared the tall brick wall that separates center field from Ashburn Alley. A recap of the game is here, while the box score is here.

“Jury leader faced grilling”: The Chicago Tribune today contains an article that begins, “Shortly after the forewoman sent U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer a note that the jury had reached a verdict in the trial of former Gov. George Ryan, Pallmeyer summoned the woman to her office.”

And The Chicago Sun-Times today contains articles headlined “Plenty of turmoil — but no mistrial ‘silver bullet’“; “When a governor goes to jail“; “’96 warrant catches up with ex-juror“; and “Tense trial had bits of unintentional comedy“; along with an op-ed by columnist Mark Brown entitled “Did defense set stage for Ryan jury turmoil?”

“Go ahead…I dare ya! With its sweeping new antiabortion law, South Dakota has ‘dared’ the Supreme Court, as one scholar puts it, to overturn Roe; Is this a clever legal strategy, or a reckless affront to the Constitution?” Columnist Christopher Shea has this essay today in the Ideas section of The Boston Globe.

“Lacrosse Purposes: How we fool ourselves into believing we are dispassionate about the Duke case.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The Not-So United States”: This article appears today in the Week in Review section of The New York Times. According to the article, “the emergence of strong state stances on social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion reflects a certain amount of political strategy and opportunism.”

“Court says widow can return; Carla Freeman should not have been deported when her husband died, the 9th Circuit says”: Saturday’s issue of The Oregonian contained this article reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on Friday.

And The Associated Press reports that “Court Rules in Favor of Deported Widow.”

“Court Protects Judicial Records; Justices Say Computer Databases On Crime, Vehicle Cases Off Limits”: Today in The Hartford Courant, Lynne Tuohy has an article that begins, “A sharply divided state Supreme Court ruled Friday that the judicial branch’s computerized records of criminal and motor vehicle cases are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, in a decision that also includes a very narrow definition of which judicial records are subject to the act.”

Yesterday’s 4-3 ruling of the Supreme Court of Connecticut consists of a majority opinion, a concurring opinion, and a dissenting opinion.

“‘Choose Life’ plates put on hold; Delay granted while ACLU works on appeal to U.S. Supreme Court”: The Tennessean today contains an article that begins, “A federal appeals court has delayed Tennessee’s production of a specialty license plate reading ‘Choose Life’ while the American Civil Liberties Union pursues a legal appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

In response to that development, the ACLU yesterday issued a press release entitled “ACLU Hails Federal Appeals Court Ruling Delaying Production of Tennessee’s Anti-Choice License Plate.”

The March 27, 2006 installment of my weekly “On Appeal” column at law.com was headlined “‘Choose Life’ Tags Appear Headed to Supreme Court.” In the final paragraph of that column, I wrote: “I expect that the Supreme Court will overturn the 6th Circuit’s ruling and will hold that Tennessee’s program violates the First Amendment due to the program’s viewpoint discrimination. At the end of the day, those who have seen ‘Choose Life’ license plates as a reason to choose litigation are likely to achieve victory in the Supreme Court.”

“State questions senators about talks with justice”: The Wichita Eagle today contains an article that begins, “An investigator from Attorney General Phill Kline’s office has interviewed state senators about potential ethics violations by Supreme Court Justice Lawton Nuss, four senators said Friday. Nuss removed himself Thursday from the ongoing litigation over school finance after informing other justices that he spoke briefly about the case with Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, and Sen. Pete Brungardt, R-Salina, on March 1.”

On Friday, The Wichita Eagle reported that “Judge pulls out of school case; A Kansas Supreme Court justice has removed himself from future discussions of the school funding case.”

Meanwhile, in other coverage, The Lawrence Journal-World reports today that “Judge’s lunch meeting scrutinized; Speaker calls for investigation of school discussion with lawmakers.”

The Topeka Capital-Journal reports that “Details of lunch chat emerge; Senator says Justice Nuss liked idea of bipartisan school finance plan.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Talks between justice, senators cause stir.”

“How judge in Ryan trial juggled turmoil over jury; Transcripts reveal struggle to keep case on track”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune, along with an article headlined “Ryan lawyers ask to talk with 2 dismissed jurors.”

And The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that “Jury room drama disclosed.” The Sun-Times also provides via this link access to PDF files of the trial transcript.

“Judges reject voting systems; Punch cards unconstitutional, federal appeals panel rules”: The Columbus Dispatch contains this article today.

The Toledo Blade reports today that “Punch-card ballots deemed biased; Ruling against Ohio may be moot by May 2.”

The Cincinnati Enquirer reports that “Court rules on punch cards.”

And The Akron Beacon Journal contains an article headlined “Punch-card voting is illegal; Professor: Appellate ruling in Ohio is first in U.S. to say a state’s equipment violates equal protection.”

“Pennsylvania Senate Race Tests Democrats’ New Abortion Tack”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

“Ex-judge shares take on the confirmation process in book”: Yesterday’s edition of The Danville (Va.) Register & Bee contained an article that begins, “If a fortuneteller had predicted for Judge Charles Pickering how his stalled nomination for the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals would leave him stuck in the middle of a polarized America, Pickering probably would have passed up the opportunity to enter the fray.”

“Court tosses conviction due to lack of details”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A 14-year-old girl’s testimony that she had a ‘sexual relationship’ with a man was not specific enough to sustain his conviction for carnal knowledge of a child, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled Friday.” You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Virginia at this link.

The Sacramento Bee is reporting: Today’s newspaper contains articles headlined “Competing ‘three-strikes’ plans emerge; One measure adds offenses; another limits third strike to serious, violent crimes” and “Providing medical pot worth the risk, pair say.”

“When the Federal Death Penalty is ‘Cruel and Unusual'”: This article (abstract with links for download) by Law Professor Michael Mannheimer is available online at SSRN.

“Court upholds $28 million judgment for smoker”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “A state appeals court upheld $28 million in punitive damages Friday for the family of a longtime cigarette smoker who died of lung cancer, in a case that could test new legal limits on punitive awards against corporate wrongdoers.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Second District Court of Appeal at this link.

“County jail strip search illegal; Ninth Circuit rejects sheriff’s blanket policy”: Yesterday’s issue of The Ventura County Star contained an article that begins, “A federal appeals court Thursday upheld a lower court ruling that a body-cavity check of a local woman at the Ventura County Jail was unconstitutional, a ruling that the woman’s attorney said could end up costing the county millions of dollars in damages.”

You can access Thursday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Insanity Offense: Too often, mentally ill people and their families can’t get help.” The Washington Post today contains an editorial that begins, “The case of Eric Michael Clark, argued before the Supreme Court this week, presents an important question concerning how far states can go in limiting the ability of mentally ill defendants to plead insanity.”

In today’s edition of The New York Times: An article reports that “After 2 Years, Microsoft Set to Appeal European Ruling.”

An article is headlined “In Old Mining Town, New Charges Over Asbestos.”

In news from New Jersey, “Ex-Nets Star Faces Retrial for a Shooting at His Home.”

And an editorial entitled “Kiss-and-Tell No More” begins, “A federal judge in Kansas has dealt another blow to the crusade by the state’s attorney general, Phill Kline, to restrict abortions under the phony banner of combating child abuse.”

Available online from law.com: An article headlined “Calif. Appeals Court Stretches Punitives Precedent, Upholds $28M Award Against Philip Morris” begins, “A California appellate court has defied — or at least stretched — precedent by upholding a $28 million punitive damages award against a major tobacco company, an amount 33 times greater than the compensatory damages.” You can access today’s ruling of California’s Second District Court of Appeal at this link.

And the brand new installment of my weekly “On Appeal” column is headlined “Arresting the Homeless Is Unconstitutional? Where the 9th Circuit Went Wrong.”

“Some Additional Thoughts on the Sixth Circuit Opinion in Stewart v. Blackwell, and the Future of Bush v. Gore in Elections”: Law Professor Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law” blog.

“Ryan lawyers called jurors liars”: The Chicago Tribune today contains an article that begins, “Lawyers for former Gov. George Ryan argued that jurors who failed to disclose arrests, including some that occurred more than 20 years ago, were liars who could not be trusted to render a fair verdict, according to newly unsealed court filings.”

“Poritz buries court criticism; Downgrades ruling to unpublished”: The New Jersey Lawyer recently published an article that begins, “In a highly unusual move, Chief Justice Deborah T. Poritz has personally seen to it – with input from other justices – that an Appellate Division decision highly critical of the way judges are pressured from the top to wrap up cases quickly was reclassified as an ‘unpublished’ rather than ‘published’ opinion.” The opinion in question of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, can be accessed here.

In the current issue of The Harvard Law Record: The newspaper contains articles headlined “Navajo Supreme Court Holds Oral Arguments at HLS” and “2nd Circuit Judge Weighs in on Presidential War Powers.”

“Appeals Court Rules Against Islanders”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court said Friday it is powerless to grant compensation to people forced from their homes on Indian Ocean islands because of the U.S. military base at Diego Garcia.” My earlier coverage is here.

“Is a church subject to vicarious liability for tortious acts of its pastor under the Restatement (Second) of Agency § 219(2)(d) if the pastor was allegedly ‘aided in accomplishing the tort by the existence of the agency relation’ with the church?” In a diversity case in which a plaintiff seeks to hold a church liable for sexual molestation allegedly suffered at the hands of the pastor, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit today issued a decision certifying the foregoing issue to the Supreme Court of Vermont.

Love v. Justice to be decided on the briefs: According to the calendar of cases pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, this potentially precedent-setting matter of great import to humanity will be submitted on June 6, 2006. Thanks much to the reader who brought this case to my attention.

Every Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead doll certificate expires at the end of 2006: The Green Bag’s web site links to the web site of Phi Alpha Delta – Mason Chapter, where you will find a link to a Microsoft Word document providing details on how you can have “the membership of Phi Alpha Delta … act as your proxy in redeeming your Certificate(s)” and then package and ship to you “your Bobblehead Doll with the love and care deserving of such an artistic treasure,” all for a mere $25 per doll.

To be sure, it would probably be even more fun to pick up your Scalia bobblehead in person or have a member of the U.S. Supreme Court‘s press corps graciously offer to do it for you, but this latest option should provide needed relief to those who are viewing with concern the impending expiration date on their Scalia bobblehead certificates.