The Arizona Law Review’s latest issue is all about the Ninth Circuit: Last fall, the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law held an event known as the “Ninth Circuit Conference.” The new issue of the Arizona Law Review (whose contents you can access online at this link) includes the papers presented at the conference.

“Appellate Experts Review 2005 Supreme Court Term”: Unwilling to wait for the bitter end of this Term, the Washington Legal Foundation last Friday held a review session featuring some lawyers whose names you may recognize. You can review the review online, on-demand by clicking here (Windows Media Player required).

“High court declines ex-governor’s appeal; Decision deals blow to Edwards, son, aide”: The Times-Picayune today contains an article that begins, “Former Gov. Edwin Edwards lost another bid Monday to overturn his sentence for fraud and racketeering when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up an appeal alleging the federal government withheld evidence at the trial in 2000.”

“For Time Being, Hedge Funds Stay Registered”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

“State court hears gay marriage ban arguments”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides this news update.

“Tennessee’s top court refuses to stop Alley execution”: The Tennessean provides this news update.

And the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit today issued an order denying rehearing en banc in the case over the dissent of six judges. Seven votes were necessary to grant rehearing en banc.

“Gay meant guilty: How gay-history experts could help free a man convicted of murder 25 years ago.” The Boston Phoenix published this article in May 2006. Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a decision reversing the federal district court’s grant of a writ of habeas corpus requiring the release or a retrial of Wayne Healy, now serving a life sentence for murder, imposed in Massachusetts state court.

And you can access the First Circuit amicus brief filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders at this link.

“Fair to Meddling: The myth of the hands-off conservative jurist.” Seth Rosenthal has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The Effect of Justice Alito”: Tom Goldstein has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

Tom was also mentioned recently in this Legal Times article (free access) about playing poker.

For those concerned that perhaps no one saw fit to comment on yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Murphy: At the “Disability Law” blog, Law Professor Sam Bagenstos has a post titled “My Take on Murphy” that begins, “This is a bad decision.”

“Supreme Court Decisions”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Law Professor Jonathan Turley appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of the public radio program “Here & Now.”

“Justices Uphold Basic Right to Choose Defense Lawyers”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

And law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “High Court Affirms Defendants’ Right to Counsel of Choice; Justices also rule on campaign finance reform, capital punishment, sentencing.”

“Odd couple’s friendship powers panel; Specter, Leahy crucial to Judiciary Committee”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Justices Reject Campaign Limits in Vermont Case”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also reports that “Political Vermonters Weigh Ruling on Campaign Finances.” And an editorial is entitled “Campaign Finance Reform Survives.”

Today in The Washington Post, Charles Lane reports that “Justices Reject Vermont’s Campaign Finance Law.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Justices Reject Vermont Campaign Finance Limits; A Vermont law curbing spending and donations was shot down in a 6-3 ruling; Liberal groups hoped it would be a model for other states.”

In The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that “High Court Strikes Down Law Limiting Campaign Financing.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Free Speech Victory: The Supreme Court declines to repeal the First Amendment–though only by 6-3.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Justices toss out political cash cap; Vermont’s limits called too severe.”

In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “High Court rejects Vt. campaign restrictions; Says rules violate First Amendment.” The newspaper also reports that “Decision could result in challenge to Mass. law.” And an editorial is entitled “Saying ‘no’ to Vermont.”

The Rutland Herald reports that “High court rejects Vt. campaign law; Rules limits unconstitutional” and “Money will pour in with limits out of the picture.” And an editorial is entitled “Money and politics.”

The Burlington Free Press reports that “High court rejects Vermont’s campaign limits” and “Vermont’s loss a blow to reformers nationwide.”

The Bennington Banner reports that “State reaction to ruling is mixed.”

The New York Sun reports that “Court Voids Vermont’s Election Law.”

The Hill reports that “Both sides pleased with campaign-finance ruling.”

The Washington Times reports that “Court rejects spending limits for candidates.”

Available at National Review Online: Allison Hayward has an essay entitled “Icky Balance: The limits to limits on political spending.”

Jonathan H. Adler has an essay entitled “All Wet: Landowners may have won the battle against federal wetlands regulations, but lost the war.”

Peter Kirsanow has an essay entitled “Affirmative Damage: Students sacrificed in the name of ‘diversity.’”

And an editorial is entitled “Not for Burning.”

“Knock Knock Knocking on Trouble’s Door: The Supreme Court’s unreasonable position on home searches.” Cathy Young has this essay online today at Reason.

Eighth Circuit holds that collection of federal probationer’s DNA under the provisions of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 does not violate that individual’s Fourth Amendment rights: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at this link.

“3rd Circuit to Weigh New FCC Wireless Rules”: Shannon P. Duffy of The Legal Intelligencer provides this report (free access) on a case that is scheduled to be argued tomorrow before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: This morning’s broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Sharply Divided High Court Rules on Death Penalty” (featuring Nina Totenberg) and “Vermont Campaign Finance Law Rejected by Supreme Court.” Real Player is required to launch these audio segments.

“This case presents the question whether an otherwise qualified individual with HIV would pose a direct threat to himself if employed by the U.S. Foreign Service, which requires officers to be ‘available to serve in assignments throughout the world.'” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued this decision today.

“Court to hear gay union issue today”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution today contains an article that begins, “Six members of the Georgia Supreme Court — and one understudy — hear arguments today on whether a ban on marriage and civil unions for same-sex couples will stay in the state constitution.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition” contained a segment entitled “Gay Marriage Ban Gets Hearing in Georgia Court” (RealPlayer required).

Via the web site of the Supreme Court of Georgia, you can view the oral argument live online right now by clicking here (RealPlayer required). And you can access the briefs filed in the case at this link.

And “Notice of Appeal” is live-blogging the oral argument.

“The secret that wasn’t: Violent felon bragged that he was real killer.” This article, the third in a three-part series, appears today in The Chicago Tribune. That newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Death in Texas.”

“Court reinstates death penalty; Kline says ‘death penalty is the law of Kansas'”: The Topeka Capital-Journal contains this article today.

The Wichita Eagle today contains articles headlined “Death penalty upheld; High court finds state law constitutional” and “Ruling echoes in local capital murder trial.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Ruling affirms will of legislature, juries.”

The Kansas City Star reports that “Death penalty restored in Kansas; The U.S. Supreme Court overturns a state high court ruling, putting at least six people back on death row.”

Charles Lane of The Washington Post reports that “Justices Clash Over Death Penalty Case; Court Narrowly Affirms Kansas Law.”

And Joan Biskupic of USA Today reports that “Justices narrowly uphold Kan. death penalty law; Ruling rejects claim that state courts lean toward execution.”

“From President Bush to local lawyers, judge, 99, is honored; District Judge Wesley Brown in Wichita was sworn in by John F. Kennedy in 1962”: This article appeared last Friday in The Wichita Eagle.

“Court rules sting legal; A lawyer will be sentenced for using a computer to entice a supposed 14-year-old”: The Kansas City Star contains this article today.

And The Springfield (Mo.) News-Leader today contains an editorial entitled “Appeals court makes right call on sex offender prosecutions.”

My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“‘Choose Life’ tags expected by fall after failed challenge; ACLU gives up after justices won’t hear case”: This article appears today in The Tennessean.

The Knoxville News Sentinel reports today that “Anti-abortion tags to be issued; U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to hear appeal ends 3-year fight over ‘Choose Life’ plates.”

And The Memphis Commercial Appeal reports that “‘Choose Life’ plates permitted; ACLU considers its options now.”

“Execution Imminent, DNA Tests Urged; Rape victims and five exonerated men join in asking Tennessee to delay a death sentence”: Henry Weinstein has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And in local coverage, The Tennessean today contains articles headlined “State readies death chamber for Reid, Alley; Executions would be about 2 hours apart” and “Alley convicted of brutal murder.”

“Judge: Blanco could not suspend suit deadline; Potentially thousands of post-Katrina cases could be affected.” This article appears today in The Advocate of Baton Rouge.

“High Court Decides Police Can Act on Tips; Justices say officers may stop drivers even if they don’t witness suspicious activity themselves”: Maura Dolan has this article today in The Los Angeles Times. My earlier coverage appears here.

The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting: Today’s newspaper contains an article headlined “Property seizure revolt heads for California; Ballot Initiative would limit use of eminent domain.”

And Bob Egelko has an article headlined “Ex-marshal’s appeal in LSD case is denied” reporting on a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Senate Debates Flag Bill; Backers Seem Near Success”: This article appears today in The New York Times, along with an editorial entitled “Burning the Bill of Rights.”

The Washington Post today contains an article headlined “In the Senate, Waving the Flag Amendment.” And Dana Milbank’s Washington Sketch column is headlined “In the Senate, Covering Themselves in Old Glory.”

The Chicago Tribune reports that “Senate expects close flag amendment vote; States likely would ratify protections.”

And The Los Angeles Times contains an editorial entitled “The case for flag-burning: An amendment banning it would make America less free.”

“City Drops Objections To Religious Sculpture; Display Doesn’t Need Permit, Agency Says”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “More than three weeks after District officials warned an evangelical Christian group about displaying a sculpture of the Ten Commandments on property across the street from the U.S. Supreme Court, they said yesterday that the 850-pound granite monument doesn’t need a permit after all.”

“Jurist Need Not Testify; Court Grants Sullivan’s Motion”: Today in The Hartford Courant, Lynne Tuohy has an article that begins, “Former Chief Justice William J. Sullivan does not have to honor a subpoena to appear before a legislative hearing to answer questions about his decision to withhold release of a controversial ruling to benefit a colleague. Such an appearance would have violated the constitutional separation of powers doctrine, a Superior Court judge ruled Monday.”

And The Waterbury Republican-American today contains an article headlined “No subpoena for former chief justice Sullivan.”

“U.S. Ends a Yearlong Effort to Obtain Library Records Amid Secrecy in Connecticut”: The New York Times contains this article today.

“A ‘Mafia Cop’ Lawyer Is Found Not Incompetent”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And The New York Sun reports today that “‘Mafia Cop’ Lawyer Defends Strategy That Resulted in a Life Sentence.”