“Justices Get Down to Business; High Court to Weigh In On String of Corporate-Related Cases”: Ben Winograd and Jess Bravin have this article (free access) today in The Wall Street Journal.
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Justices Take Up Climate Debate; Environmentalists and 12 states, including California, hope the high court will order new emission rules to fight global warming.”
The New York Times reports that “Justices Agree to Consider New Case on Emissions” and “Supreme Court to Review Antitrust Case Against Phone Companies.”
The Washington Post reports that “High Court to Hear Greenhouse Gas Case; States, Groups Push for Regulation.”
USA Today reports that “Court to hear case on federal regulation of ‘greenhouse gases.’”
The Washington Times reports that “Court to review EPA’s refusal to regulate CO2.”
And law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Patent and Clean Air Act Cases.”
“Studying the State of the Las Vegas Judiciary: An Illustration of the Problems that Arise When Judges Are Elected, Not Appointed.” Carl Tobias has this essay today online at FindLaw.
More news regarding the author of the blog “Underneath Their Robes“: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued this order today. And while it is not uncommon to see someone added as counsel retroactively in support of the winning side of an appeal, deserving of even more respect are those who seek to be added as counsel retroactively in support of the losing side on appeal. Today’s earlier news regarding the subject of this post can be accessed here.
“We address in this case the effect of an anonymous tip, received by police, that a certain type of vehicle, driving in a certain direction, was driving illegally. The majority today concludes a tip of this nature provides reasonable cause to detain the driver of such a vehicle, even though police fail to confirm any alleged illegality.” Dividing 4-3, the Supreme Court of California issued this ruling today.
“Court Upholds Little Rock Desegregation”: The AP provides this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued today.
“Court to Hear Arguments in Taped Call Case”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court has agreed to hear new arguments in a case involving an illegally taped telephone call leaked to reporters by Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. In an announcement late Monday, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said all nine judges will hear McDermott’s appeal of the taped call case, which dates back nearly a decade.”
My earlier coverage of the divided three-judge D.C. Circuit panel’s ruling in the case, from March 2006, can be accessed here and here.
Available online from National Public Radio: On this evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had audio segments entitled “High Court Throws Out Vermont Campaign Limits” and “Court’s Docket: Detainees, Texas Districts.”
And today’s broadcast of “Day to Day” contained audio segments entitled “Court Rules on Campaign Spending, Death Penalty” (featuring Dahlia Lithwick) and “U.S. Senate to Debate Flag-Burning Amendment.”
RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
“Jim Haynes deserves a vote in Senate to become judge”: William J. Watkins Jr., author of the “South Carolina Appellate Law Blog,” has this op-ed today in The Greenville News.
“Lat quits Wonkette; To do law blog for Spiers”: Via Romenesko comes this news (second item) from, of all places, Women’s Wear Daily. Obviously, blogging about the law non-stop is too much fun to abandon for coverage of politics and cute interns.
“The Fifth Annual Supreme Court Breakfast Table”: Slate today has launched this conversation between Dahlia Lithwick
and Walter Dellinger.
Stephen Henderson of Knight Ridder Newspapers is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Justices reject strict limits on campaign contributions” and “Supreme Court takes new direction on death penalty.”
“Justices Block Vermont Campaign Finance Law”: Neil A. Lewis of The New York Times provides this news update.
“Supreme Court to Hear Greenhouse Gas Case”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.
And The New York Times provides a news update headlined “Justices to Rule on Regulation of Carbon Dioxide.”
Warren Richey is reporting: Tuesday in The Christian Science Monitor, he will have articles headlined “High court strikes state’s campaign fund limits; It found that Vermont’s restrictions amounted to government censorship, violating the free speech of candidates“; “High court defers to states on death penalty; Monday’s 5-4 ruling lets them decide how juries should weigh evidence in sentencing convicts“: and “High court to hear ‘greenhouse’ case; It will consider whether the EPA must regulate carbon dioxide, which is said to contribute to global warming.”
The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Justices: Defendants Can Hire Own Lawyers“; “Supreme Court Refuses Appeal in Drug Case“; “Justices Refuse Winnie the Pooh Case“; “Justices Reject Appeal in Hip-Hop Case“; and “Justices Won’t Hear Ex-La. Governor Appeal.”
“High Court Affirms Defendants’ Right to Counsel of Choice; Decision is one of several handed down Monday, in what is likely to be the final week of the current term”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.
“Our circuit has not previously decided whether an attempt to entice a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity requires that the intended victim be an actual minor.” Today a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a decision holding that no actual minor is required to gain a conviction of that federal crime.
Three-judge Federal Circuit panel divides over Seventh Amendment right to jury trial on factual questions of intent to deceive and materiality of deceptively withheld information: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit at this link. In her dissenting opinion, Circuit Judge Pauline Newman offers an interesting historical review of the right to a jury trial on these sorts of factual issues.
Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List and opinions in argued cases: The Court today issued decisions in five cases and announced that the next day on which opinions will issue will be Wednesday. That likely will be the final date on which opinions will issue this Term, although additional orders could issue on Thursday.
1. The Court issued its ruling in Randall v. Sorrell, No. 04-1528, a matter better known as the Vermont campaign finance case. You can access the oral argument transcript here. Additional information about the case is available at this link.
2. The Court issued its ruling in Kansas v. Marsh, No. 04-1170, one of the cases reargued after Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined the Court. You can access the oral argument transcripts here and here. Additional information about the case is available at this link.
3. The Court issued its ruling in Washington v. Recuenco, No. 05-83. You can access the oral argument transcript here. Additional information about the case is available at this link.
4. The Court issued its ruling in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, No. 05-352. You can access the oral argument transcript here. Additional information about the case is available at this link.
5. And finally, the Court issued its decision in Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Murphy, No. 05-18. You can access the oral argument transcript here. Additional information about the case is available at this link.
You can access today’s Order List at this link. The Court today granted review in five cases and called for the views of the Solicitor General in an additional case.
At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has posts titled “Decisions: campaign finance limits nullified; five rulings overall” and “Orders: Court grants EPA, four other cases.”
In early news coverage, Gina Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Alito Breaks Tie, Kan. Death Penalty Stays” and “High Court Declines Anti-Abortion Tag Case.” The AP is also reporting that “High Court Rejects Vt. Campaign Finance Law” and “Supreme Court to Hear Bush Environment Case.”
“Man Says He’s on Heroin to Avoid Jury Duty”: The Associated Press provides this report.
And in local coverage, The Columbus Dispatch on Saturday reported that “Irreverent would-be juror finds joke’s on him.”
“Roberts’s First Term Gave Companies Most of What They Sought”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News provides this report.
“Kansans on death row wait for court’s ruling”: The Wichita Eagle today contains an article that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this week in a case that will likely decide whether prosecutors can pursue death sentences against two of the alleged killers of Chelsea Brooks.”
“Court Review of Wiretaps May Be Near, Senator Says”: This article appears today in The New York Times.
In news from Oklahoma: The Tulsa World yesterday reported that “Police report links former judge, missing trial witness.” On Saturday, the newspaper reported that “Jurors learn of ex-judge’s maladies; A prosecution witness demonstrates how to operate a penis pump.” And on Friday, the newspaper reported that “Former jurors take stand; One testifies that the defense attorney tried to persuade her to change her testimony.”
In other coverage, The Sapulpa (Okla.) Daily Herald reported Saturday that “Thompson’s DNA found on robe, expert says.” On Friday, the newspaper reported that “Former jurors testify in Thompson trial.” And on Thursday, the newspaper reported that “Employees testify judge had exposed himself.”
“A Phantom, or the Killer? A prosecutor said Carlos Hernandez didn’t exist; But he did, and his MO fit the crime.” This article — part two of a three-part series — appears today in The Chicago Tribune. And today’s newspaper also contains a related article headlined “Co-prosecutor knew of Hernandez; He now says he should have told his partner.”
“This Land Is Wetland: The Supreme Court issues an environmental ruling that does little yet threatens much.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.
“Why Pay a Fraud Plaintiff to Sue?” Law Professor Richard A. Booth has this essay today at washingtonpost.com.
“Roberts plays dual roles: Chief justice and father; Family life reflects generational shift in Supreme Court.” Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.
“Hedge funds no longer required to register with SEC; Ruling won’t affect agency’s ability to prosecute on fraud charges”: USA Today contains this article today. My earlier coverage appears here and here.
“Flag-Burning Debate Reclaims Spotlight; Senate Plans to Vote on Constitutional Amendment This Week”: This article (free access) appears today in The Wall Street Journal.
USA Today reports today that “Flag desecration could become an issue in state elections.”
And in the “Talk of the Town” section of the June 3, 2006 issue of The New Yorker, Hendrik Hertzberg has a Comment entitled “For Which it Stands.”
“Blawg Review #63”: Available onlne here at “The Airport Lawyer.”
“How Appealing” will host “Blawg Review #64” on Monday, July 3, 2006, and instructions on how to submit a post from your blog for inclusion in next week’s installment can be accessed here.
“Judges get home security; Lefkow slayings spur expansion of measures to safeguard jurists”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.
“Scalia twisted my words”: Samuel Walker has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Once Symbolic, Flag Amendment Close to Passage; The constitutional ban on burning may have enough Senate votes; Debate begins this week”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.
And James Kuhnhenn of Knight Ridder Newspapers reports that “Flag desecration vote expected to be close.”
“Court Ruling Could Halt Guantanamo Trials”: The Associated Press provides this report.
In recent coverage from Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald, “Gitmo prison camp sends home 14 Saudis“; “Detainee lawyers win recognition; Three Guantanamo lawyers were picked for a prestigious list of the nation’s top 100 attorneys; They are a Navy officer, a New York civil libertarian and a retired judge, all defenders of the detainees“; “Ex-general: Prison camp is a legal mess; A retired general got a first post-suicides tour of Guantanamo and declared it abuse-free; But he said the Bush administration needs to better define the captives’ status“; and “War court at camp to take a hiatus; The Pentagon keeps the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, war court closed for at least a month following three captives’ apparent suicides in the prison camps.”
And today in The New York Times, Law Professor Eric Posner has an op-ed entitled “A Threat That Belongs Behind Bars.”
