“Experts Say Bush’s Goal in Terrorism Bill Is Latitude for Interrogators’ Methods”: The New York Times on Tuesday will contain this article.

And The Washington Post on Tuesday will report that “White House Offers New Proposal on Interrogations.”

“Canadian Was Falsely Accused, Panel Says; Muslim Held by U.S. Was Sent to Syria For Interrogation”: This front page article will appear Tuesday in The Washington Post.

And Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times will report that “Canadians Fault U.S. for Its Role in Torture Case.”

You can access the Arar Commission’s report at this link.

In Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times: Tomorrow’s newspaper will contain articles headlined “Inmate Awaits Final Ruling on Lethal Injection” and “Proposal on Military Chaplains and Prayer Holds Up Bill.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Condemned Fla. Inmate Hopes for 2nd Stay” and “Fla. Judge Scolded for Ethics Violations.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “White House to Revise Terror Proposal” and “Lawyers Go to Court for Gitmo Detainee.”

“Bad Party Line: All the reasons to hate Bush’s wiretapping bill.” Law Professor Bruce Ackerman has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Divorce and disposable military retirement pay: Today, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a ruling in favor of the Secretary of Defense in a lawsuit brought by current and retired members of the armed forces whose retirement pay has been divided in state divorce proceedings. Anyone desiring the details of today’s complex ruling can access it here.

“Wecht trial delayed while attorneys wait for appeals court ruling”: The Associated Press provides this report.

And The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review provides a news update headlined “Wecht trial in jeopardy.”

My earlier coverage appears at this link.

In today’s mail: The Summer 2006 issue of The Green Bag (table of contents not yet available online).

And a reader emails to draw my attention to the fact that a Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead doll is now being auctioned on eBay, where the high bid is currently $250.00.

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Senate GOP, White House Work on Interrogation Deal” and “The Origins of the Geneva Conventions” (RealPlayer required).

“The Battle for Guantanamo”: This audio segment (available online in both RealPlayer and Windows Media Player formats) appeared on today’s broadcast of the public radio program “On Point.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Anti-Abortion Group Fights Campaign Law” and “Court Issues Stay in Tenn. Execution.”

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejects facial challenge to the constitutionality of a San Diego County ordinance limiting residential picketing: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

“Paul Roney, prominent U.S. judge, dies at 85; A champion of civil rights, he was a pillar in the civic community and influenced many lawyers”: This obituary appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.

The Tampa Tribune contains an obituary entitled “Former Chief Judge Was Dedicated To Work.”

And the blog “Abstract Appeal” provides a post titled “Judge Roney Passes.”

“[T]his case is about whether the City of Newark may employ a race-based transfer and assignment policy when any racial imbalance in the 108 fire companies is not the result of past intentional discrimination by the City. We hold that it may not and, accordingly, will reverse the District Court’s entry of judgment for the defendants.” Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an opinion that begins:

On July 1, 2002, Sharpe James, newly re-elected as Mayor of Newark, New Jersey, issued a “mandate” in his
inaugural speech that, “to improve morale,” all single-race fire companies in the Newark Fire Department would be eliminated. The racial composition of each of the 108 fire companies was thereafter examined, and dozens of firefighters were involuntarily transferred to different companies solely on the basis of their race. In January 2004, Mayor James announced that “[w]e have created a rainbow at each firehouse.” The firefighters sued, and lost.

And today’s opinion ends:

We conclude this opinion as we began, by reiterating what this case is not about. It is not about remedying intentional discrimination in the Newark Fire Department. It is not about improving the Department’s ability to extinguish fires. It is not about whether diverse work places are good for employees or for society or whether long-range hiring goals are being met. This case is about whether Newark can “create[ ] a rainbow” in each of the 108 companies solely by means of a racial classification. We hold that it cannot. Racial balancing, and that is what this is, simply cannot be achieved by means of a racial classification without running afoul of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Accordingly, we will reverse the order of the District Court, and
remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

You can access the complete ruling at this link.

“In combination, the ballot access requirements for independent legislative candidates in Illinois–the early filing deadline, the 10% signature requirement, and the additional statutory restriction that disqualifies anyone who signs an independent candidate’s nominating petition from voting in the primary–operate to unconstitutionally burden the freedom of political association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.” That’s the conclusion that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reached in an opinion issued today. Circuit Judge Diane S. Sykes wrote the opinion.

The decision goes on to explain, “Ballot access barriers this high–they are the most restrictive in the nation and have effectively eliminated independent legislative candidacies from the Illinois political scene for a quarter of a century–are not sustainable based on the state’s asserted interest in deterring party splintering, factionalism, and frivolous candidacies.”

Update: At his “Election Law” blog, Rick Hasen provides these thoughts about the ruling.

“Gonzales Defends Interrogation Methods”: Hope Yen of The Associated Press provides this report.

My “20 questions for the appellate judge” interview with Ninth Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt quoted today in The Los Angeles Times: As I noted here earlier this morning, David G. Savage today has an article headlined “Did Victim’s Photo Prejudice a Jury? Another ruling by the liberal-leaning 9th Circuit comes under Supreme Court review” in The Los Angeles Times. As posted online, page two of that article quotes from my “20 questions for the appellate judge” interview with Judge Reinhardt. You can access the complete interview by clicking here.

“Wecht lawyers take judge dispute to appeals court”: Jason Cato had this article last Wednesday in The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

And The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported last Wednesday that “Lawyers for Wecht, U.S. clash; Defense presses for ouster of trial judge.”

Today, I have been reliably informed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit last Friday entered an order staying the case, which had been scheduled for trial on October 16, 2006.

“When Terrorists Talk… The president has a power to listen that lies beyond FISA’s scope.” John Schmidt has this essay (free access) today in Legal Times.

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Western Voters Weigh Shift in Property Rights“; “Guantanamo Tightens Security After Prisoner Riot“; “President Bush Keeps the Focus on Terrorism“; and “House Considers Changes to Church-and-State Suits” (RealPlayer required).

“When Can an Inmate ‘Volunteer’ for Death? 9th Circuit rejects a competent inmate’s decision to abandon legal challenge to his capital sentence.” The new installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed here.

Available online from The Nation: The magazine’s October 2, 2006 issue will contain an editorial entitled “Lawless ‘Compromises.’”

And Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith have an essay entitled “Torture and the Content of our Character.”

“Compromise Called Possible on Interrogations”: This article appears today in The New York Times. And columnist Bob Herbert has an op-ed entitled “The Kafka Strategy” (TimesSelect subscription required).

Today’s issue of USA Today contains articles headlined “Compromise on CIA interrogations possible; Key GOP senators, Bush at odds” and “At issue: How suspects are treated.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Negroponte Says Ruling Halted ‘Tough’ CIA Methods; The intelligence chief cites ‘legal uncertainties’ about terrorism-related interrogations since the Supreme Court case.”

The Washington Times reports that “Republicans see compromise on terror detainees.”

The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial entitled “Geneva Contention: Does John McCain favor the CIA interrogations or not?”

And in The Washington Post, Tom Malinowski has an op-ed entitled “Call Cruelty What It Is.”

“Did Victim’s Photo Prejudice a Jury? Another ruling by the liberal-leaning 9th Circuit comes under Supreme Court review.” David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Ginsburg, at UA, lauds 2 Arizona justices”: This article appeared last Thursday in The Arizona Daily Star.

Related video coverage from KOLD News 13 can be accessed via this link.

Happy belated birthday to U.S. Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter: His 67th birthday was yesterday.

“The ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ Student Speech Case: With Kenneth Starr Seeking High Court Review Of The Ninth Circuit Decision, Is Someone Blowing Smoke?” Julie Hilden has this essay online at FindLaw.

“Blawg Review #75”: Available here, at “Concurring Opinions.”