“Dramatic drop in Supreme Court rulings fuels questions”: The Toronto Globe and Mail on Saturday published an article that begins, “A steady drop in the number of judgments produced by the Supreme Court of Canada hit a striking new low in 2006, with the court rendering just 59 decisions. Statistics compiled by The Globe and Mail show a total that is dramatically lower than years such as 1990, when the court rendered 144 rulings, and 1993, when it handed down 138 rulings. Even measured against its declining output over the past decade, the court still managed an average output in the range of 85 to 90 judgments.”
“FBI Details Possible Detainee Abuse”: The Associated Press provides this report.
And CNN.com provides a report headlined “FBI: Workers saw prisoner abuse at Guantanamo.”
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s “Guantanamo Bay Inquiry” can be accessed here.
On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Bush May Have Lost Chance to Tailor Bugging Law” and “Mass. Votes to Allow Gay-Marriage Ban Proposal.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
“Ayotte asks judge to keep notification”: Saturday’s edition of The Concord (N.H.) Monitor contained an article that begins, “In the coming months, lawmakers will consider repealing the state’s 2003 parental-notification law that requires a minor to tell a parent or judge before having an abortion. In the meantime, however, the court battle over the law’s legality continues.”
“Justice Appointed by Ford, Remembers Late President; Exclusive Interview: John Paul Stevens Recalls Ford’s Selection Over Conservative Favorite.” Jan Crawford Greenburg has this written report at ABCNews.com.
Justice John Paul Stevens interviewed today by ABC News reporter Jan Crawford Greenburg: A producer for the ABC News program “Nightline” sends along the following via email:
Don’t know if you’d heard, but Jan Crawford Greenburg had an exclusive, 20-minute sit down on-camera interview this afternoon with Justice John Paul Stevens in which Stevens talked about his memories of Jerry Ford and his judicial philosophy. It was Stevens first and only network television interview. Stevens told Greenburg that when he met Ford, just days before he nominated him to the Court, “my two very firm impressions from that meeting were, one, he was a fine lawyer; and two, he was the kind of person I would really like to have as a friend, because you like him right away.” In regard to his judicial philosophy, Greenburg noted that when he nominated him, Ford believed Stevens was “a moderate conservative” and she asked him, “How do you see yourself now.” “As a moderate conservative,” he replied. “I don’t really think I’ve changed. I think there have been a lot of changes in the court.”
Portions of the interview are scheduled to appear on this evening’s broadcasts of ABC World News Tonight and Nightline.
“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”: Back on December 23, 2006, Henry Weinstein had this article in The Los Angeles Times.
My post that day noting The LATimes article concluded, “I am attempting to obtain a copy of the decision so that I can post it online at ‘How Appealing.'”
More recently, on Wednesday, December 27, 2006, The Daily Journal of California published an article by Drew Combs headlined “Confidential Opinion Gets Onto Web Site; Panel’s Decision to Sanction Judge Real Was Pending Appeal.”
The place where the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, No. 05-89097 (Nov. 16, 2006), appeared online for more than a week was Westlaw, at the citation 2006 WL 3478274. A Westlaw search for that citation now returns no result. I have succeeded in obtaining a copy of the ruling in the form of a Westlaw printout made when the decision was freely available online for anyone with a Westlaw account to access.
The copy of the ruling that I have obtained is not of high visual quality. It appears to have been faxed more than once, and I have scanned it into a PDF file, which may have further diminished its visual clarity. In addition, the copy of the ruling includes some underlining, all of which was added by someone other than me. Finally, my copy of the document is currently missing page 9 of the Westlaw printout. I am in the process of seeking to obtain that missing page, and if I succeed in doing so I will promptly post it online. You can access all but page 9 of the Westlaw printout of the ruling by clicking here.
“Wisconsin’s Judicial Speech Restrictions Challenged”: The James Madison Center for Free Speech has posted online a press release (currently second item) that begins, “Several Plaintiffs including Wisconsin Right to Life filed suit Friday in federal court seeking to enjoin Wisconsin’s canons that forbid state court judicial candidates from responding to a questionnaire asking their views on legal and political issues.”
You can also access online the federal court complaint and plaintiffs’ memorandum of law in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
“Mass. Lawmakers Vote on Gay Marriage”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Lawmakers in Massachusetts, the only state where gay marriage is legal, voted Tuesday to allow a proposed constitutional amendment to move forward that would effectively ban it.”
What’s new in Kalamazoo? The Kalamazoo Gazette reported on Saturday that “Officials expected to resume work to fill federal, circuit court openings.”
“Mass. Gov-Elect Urges No Marriage Vote”: The Associated Press provides this report.
“Law professor battles ALS”: The Tallahassee Democrat last week published an article that begins, “A law professor who has proven himself brilliant at defending the constitutional right of free speech soon will be deprived of his ability to speak.”
“The Unpersuasive Chief: Are judges undercompensated? Maybe, but Chief Justice Roberts doesn’t make the case.” Matthew J. Franck has this essay today at National Review Online.
“Old notes detail judge’s thoughts”: This article appears today in The Concord (N.H.) Monitor.
“Putting God in His Place: New Jersey student-warrior for the Constitution gets a death threat.” Columnist Nat Hentoff has this essay online at The Village Voice.
“Letting go of holds: Senators shouldn’t be allowed to single-handedly delay nominations or bills.” The Los Angeles Times today contains an editorial that begins, “Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), one of Congress’ conservative culture warriors, opposes one of President Bush’s judicial nominees because she dared to attend a same-sex commitment ceremony in 2002. Whether they want to enable the senator’s bigotry is a question for Kansans and, eventually perhaps, the rest of us (Brownback is a possible 2008 presidential candidate). But the Senate can and should take action to prevent a single senator from imposing his prejudices on the entire body.”
“Gay marriage outcome today uncertain”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “Supporters of same-sex marriage are scrambling to hold together a shaky coalition of lawmakers today in hopes of blocking a vote on a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “The expanding circle of rights.”
The Boston Herald reports today that “Gay-wed opponents vow fight to the end.”
And The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts contains an editorial entitled “State must preserve gay marriage rights.”
“Fairness for Lewinsky”: Columnist Richard Cohen has this op-ed today in The Washington Post.
N.B. Can’t claim “no relation” here. Nonetheless, entries in this blog’s recurring “no relation” series can be accessed via this link.
“Texas Smuggling Deaths Retrial to Resume”: The Associated Press provides this report.
“Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military”: Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman John M. Shalikashvili has this op-ed today in The New York Times.
“The Former Magnificent Seven”: On Saturday, The Wall Street Journal contained an editorial (temporary free access) that begins, “As the clock moved toward midnight in the judicial year yesterday, two federal appeals court judges issued an exquisite, brief ruling that should have members of the legal fraternity clucking from Manhattan to San Francisco.”
My earlier coverage appears at this link.
“A Federal Appeals Court Upholds the Government’s Seizure of Computer Records of Major League Baseball Players’ Drug Tests”: Michael C. Dorf has this essay online today at FindLaw.
