“Stinging new book may cost judge job, some say”: This article will appear Tuesday in The St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

“The meaning of Brown vs. the Board: The 1954 opinion did not establish colorblindness as a legal principle; There is no ambiguity to be decided in the high court’s current cases.” Law Professor Goodwin Liu has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.

“FBI Chided for OKC Bomb Investigation”: The AP provides a report that begins, “A two-year congressional inquiry into the Oklahoma City bombing concludes that the FBI didn’t fully investigate whether other suspects may have helped Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols with the deadly 1995 attack, allowing questions to linger a decade later.”

“High Court Becomes More Media Friendly”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Blawg Review Awards 2006”: Available here, from “Blawg Review.”

“Md. Death Penalty May Come To Fore”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“High court could rule school desegregation plans unconstitutional”: The MetroWest Daily News of Framingham, Massachusetts today contains an article that begins, “Framingham’s system for creating racially balanced schools – along with about 20 other policies in districts across the state – could be considered unconstitutional if the U.S. Supreme Court, as many expect, rules in favor of the plaintiffs in two cases it heard earlier this month.”

“Supreme Court justice has surgery”: The Associated Press provides this report from Vermont. The Supreme Court of Vermont has just five Justices, and Justice Brian L. Burgess is the court’s newest member.

“Voiding of same-sex divorce is appealed”: On Thursday, The Tulsa World published an article that begins, “A woman who sought a same-gender divorce in Tulsa County is appealing a judge’s decision to set aside the divorce decree that he granted last month when he didn’t know that both parties in the case were women. Documents filed Wednesday with the state Supreme Court indicate that issues being raised on appeal include whether the Oklahoma Constitution — which states that a marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman — is unconstitutional.” You can also access the article in PDF format.

“Kansas judge dismisses abortion charges; The outgoing attorney general’s case against a doctor is tossed; ‘This is war,’ says the head of Kansans for Life”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “Hours after the outgoing attorney general of Kansas charged one of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers with illegally aborting viable fetuses, a judge dismissed the charges, ruling Friday that the attorney general had overstepped his authority”

The Kansas City Star reports today that “Kline’s abortion charges derailed; A judge dismisses 30 counts filed by the attorney general against a Wichita doctor.”

The Wichita Eagle reports that “Kline charges Tiller; Foulston intervenes.”

The Topeka Capital-Journal reports that “Kline speaks out against dismissal of charges.”

And The Lawrence Journal-World reports that “Soon as filed, charges against abortion doctor dismissed; Outgoing AG’s actions criticized.”

“Man arrested at Qwest resigns; Prosecutor was allegedly having sex”: This article appears today in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

“Condemned killer claims innocence 25 years later”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “Condemned killer Mumia Abu-Jamal isn’t getting his hopes up. The former radio reporter who was convicted of murdering a Philadelphia policeman in 1981 is appealing his death sentence on grounds that his lawyer Robert Bryan says offer his best chance yet of a new trial.”

“A Matter of Degrees: John Roberts is Taking His Time to Reshape the High Court.” Tony Mauro will have this article (free access) in next week’s issue of Legal Times.

“Judicial hopeful steps aside; Bush’s nominee for 5th Circuit withdrawing amid criticism”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article that begins, “Jackson lawyer Michael Wallace said he will ask President Bush on Tuesday to withdraw his nomination to the the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”

“Web error reveals censure of U.S. judge; In a rare move only inadvertently made public, action is urged against Manuel L. Real of L.A. for misconduct”: Today in The Los Angeles Times, Henry Weinstein has an article that begins, “A judicial discipline council has voted overwhelmingly to impose sanctions on a veteran Los Angeles federal judge who improperly seized control of a bankruptcy case to protect a probationer he was supervising. But it is far from clear when, or even whether, the decision of the judicial council of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco will become officially public.”

The article goes on to report that “[t]he council’s order was inadvertently posted for more than a week on the Internet by Thomson/West, a legal publishing service. Four legal scholars who reviewed the judicial council’s opinion for The Times said the decision was well-grounded, and they expressed dismay that it had not been made public immediately.”

I am attempting to obtain a copy of the decision so that I can post it online at “How Appealing.”

“BALCO prosecutors urge jail for reporters; 18-month sentence sought for refusing to identify sources”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “Two Chronicle reporters acted ‘in furtherance of crimes’ in obtaining leaked grand jury transcripts of athletes testifying about steroids, and should be jailed for up to 18 months for not revealing the source of the transcripts, federal prosecutors told an appeals court Friday.”

“Appeals Panel Cuts Award in Valdez Spill by Exxon”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Punitive damages in ’89 Alaska spill cut nearly in half; Court rules Exxon’s actions not malicious.”

And The Anchorage Daily News reports today that “Exxon fine for oil spill is slashed on appeal; Punitive damages drop to $2.5 billion from $4.5 billion.”

“‘Lawyer’ Accused of Doing a Little Too Much for a ‘Client'”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

And The Smoking Gun web site has an item headlined “Phony Lawyer In Jail Sex Ruse; Maryland woman impersonated attorney to orchestrate inmate tryst.”

You can access my earlier coverage at this link.

Available online from law.com: An article reports that “Prisoners’ Right to Internet Materials Contested; Bans on inmate mail generated from the Net are triggering lawsuits.”

And the new installment of my “On Appeal” column is headlined “2006 Appellate Year in Review.”

For the “Southern Appeal” blog, “The curtain closes”: Details at this link.

“What Was Alberto R. Gonzales Thinking?: And what did Judge David Tatel write?” Jack Shafer has this Press Box essay online at Slate.

“Travelers Test Rules on Flying Without Identification”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition.” The segment refers to a related cert. petition (which you can access via this link) pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Another reason for Carter G. Phillips to drop the f-bomb? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit today issued its ruling in Maine People’s Alliance v. Mallinckrodt, Inc.

The First Circuit’s opinion begins, “In the teeth of two decades of contrary precedent from four circuits, defendant-appellant Mallinckrodt, Inc. asks us to restrict the role of private citizens in the abatement of imminent and substantial threats to the environment and public health. In support of this entreaty, Mallinckrodt presents a gallimaufry of new, hitherto unconsidered arguments.”

And the opinion ends, “Despite an impressive array of arguments, skillfully presented by extraordinarily able counsel, Mallinckrodt has not persuaded us that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue, that its cramped interpretation of RCRA § 7002(a)(1)(B) is what Congress had in mind, or that the district court acted outside the realm of its discretion in fashioning a remedy for the threatened harm. Consequently, we uphold the district court’s rulings in all respects.”

“Charges Against Kan. Abortion Doc Dumped”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Kansas’ attorney general, a vocal abortion opponent, charged a well-known abortion provider with illegally performing late-term abortions, but a Sedgwick County judge on Friday threw out the charges after less than a day.”

Corporations don’t have sex lives, nor do they have a federal constitutional right to facilitate their customers’ rights to engage in consensual homosexual sex acts: A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today rejected due to lack of standing an appeal taken by a Phoenix-based gay men’s social club that was seeking to assert a constitutional challenge to a city ordinance prohibiting the operation of “live sex act” businesses. You can access today’s ruling at this link.

Ninth Circuit orders reduction in Exxon Valdez punitive damages from $4.5 billion to $2.5 billion: Now both sides can claim victory, as it’s not every day that a defense lawyer can save his client $2 billion, nor is it every day that a plaintiff’s lawyer can have even a $2.5 billion punitive damages verdict upheld on appeal. You can access today’s ruling by a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link. The dissenting judge would have affirmed the entire $4.5 billion punitive damages award at issue in today’s decision.

Update: In early news coverage, David Kravets of The Associated Press reports that “Court Cuts Valdez Judgment Against Exxon.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Damages Reduced by Almost Half.”

D.C. Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh issues recusal-related opinion: In a short opinion issued today, Judge Kavanaugh explains why he denied a motion to recuse from hearing a case involving the “Softwood Lumber” dispute between the United States and Canada.

Also today, a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel issued a decision on the merits of the case, and Judge Kavanaugh was the author of the court’s majority opinion.

“Indians lose state Supreme Court ruling; Justices narrowly back a political watchdog agency’s lawsuit against a Palm Springs-area tribe over campaign law violations despite their sovereign immunity”: Today in The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan has an article that begins, “A divided California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Indian tribes can be sued for violating the state’s campaign disclosure law even though tribes enjoy sovereign immunity under federal law. The 4-3 ruling is unprecedented and may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has consistently protected Indian immunity from lawsuits.”

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article headlined “Ruling on campaign disclosure; Tribes can be sued for late gift reports.”

And Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, has an article headlined “Tribal immunity rejected in political-funding case.”

You can access yesterday’s 4-3 ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

“Ruling weakens law’s limits on corporate political ads”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

The New York Times reports today that “Court Overturns Limits on Political Ads, Part of the Campaign Finance Law.”

The Washington Post reports that “Issue Advocacy Ads May Run During an Election, Three-Judge Court Rules.”

The Washington Times reports that “Issue ads allowed in election run-up.”

And at his “Election Law” blog, Law Professor Rick Hasen has a post titled “Court Adopts ‘See No Evil’ Approach in Campaign Finance Case; Major Changes Could Be on the Horizon.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling by a three-judge U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“Married names for grooms: Husbands have too hard a time adopting their wives’ last names.” The Los Angeles Times contains this editorial today.

“Gays get marriage without the name; Corzine signs bill creating civil unions”: This article appears today in The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger. In addition, the newspaper contains an editorial entitled “One step forward for gays.”

And The Philadelphia Inquirer reports today that “N.J. takes step with civil unions; Gov. Corzine made them official for gay couples; Advocates predicted state marriage rights would not be far behind.”

“Media-Sourcing Debate on Deck at Capitol; Congress Is Likely to Revisit Calls for Federal Shield Law As Baseball Case Culminates”: Jess Bravin and Sarah Ellison have this article (free access) today in The Wall Street Journal.

“The Israeli Supreme Court Rules on ‘Targeted Killings'”: Joanne Mariner has this essay online today at FindLaw.

My earlier coverage appears here and here.

“Senator Brownback and the Judge”: The New York Times on Friday will contain an editorial that begins, “If most people were asked to list the qualities they want in a federal judge, few would include ‘has not attended a same-sex commitment ceremony.’ But that was the outrageous litmus test that Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, applied to Janet Neff, whose nomination he has been blocking.”

“SJC role in gay marriage vote argued; Plaintiffs want legislators guided”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

And The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts reports today that “Gay marriage lawsuit argued.”