“9th Circuit Axes Bigger Panels; Move to put 15 judges on en banc panels cut short”: Pamela A. MacLean has this article (free access) in this week’s issue of The National Law Journal.

“N.Y. Federal Judge Strikes Down Many New Attorney Ad Rules; Finds state failed to prove that ban on certain content advanced goal of protecting public from misleading ads”: law.com provides this report.

And the blog “f/k/a” has a post titled “federal court decimates NY lawyer ad rules” that provides this link to the ruling filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York.

Apparently all lawyers aren’t hacks: law.com reports that “Federal Judge Clears Law Firm Accused of Hacking Opponents’ Web Archives.”

You can access last Friday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Attorney General Gonzales Refuses to Resign”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

“Adidas’ use of kangaroo hide is illegal, state justices say”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update that begins, “Soccer cleats and other athletic footwear made with prized kangaroo skin is illegal to sell in California under a decision today by the California Supreme Court.”

And The San Francisco Chronicle provides a news update headlined “State Supreme Court nixes sales of shoes made with kangaroo hide.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

“House judiciary chairman seeks contempt charges against Bush aides”: McClatchy Newspapers provide this report.

And The Washington Post provides a news update headlined “House Committee to Vote on Contempt Charges; Conflict Comes as Gonzales Prepares for Senate Testimony.”

“POW status is key to future for Noriega”: Today in The Miami Herald, Jay Weaver has an article that begins, “Lawyers for former Panamanian dictator Manuel Antonio Noriega, who is set to be released from prison, plan to challenge a new French extradition request in Miami today, arguing that it would violate his rights as a prisoner of war.”

“U.S. prison unlikely to be a ‘Cupcake’ walk for Black; Days of golf, take-out over as U.S. cracks down on corporate felons”: This article appears today in The Toronto Star.

ABA Journal revamps its web site: You can access the revamped web site at this link. And the blog “LawBeat” has nice things to say about the ABA Journal’s new online approach.

“The Republican (Not So) Short List”: Tom Goldstein has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Girl, 8, Back With Chinese Parents”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A Chinese couple regained legal custody of their 8-year-old daughter Monday after a seven-year fight to get her back from what was supposed to be temporary foster care.”

And today’s issue of The Commercial Appeal of Memphis contains an article headlined “Anna’s reunion with parents is today; Father hopes for ‘normal, carefree’ life for 8-year-old.”

“Antonin Scalia Supreme Court Justice Signed Baseball”: The eBay auction for this item is scheduled to conclude later today.

“Punt Return: Congress must decide the fate of enemy combatants at Guantanamo.” Benjamin Wittes has this essay online today at The New Republic.

Four judges serving on the Ninth Circuit gain a bit more free time: The Ninth Circuit’s experiment with fifteen-judge en banc panels does not appear to have been a rousing success, as effective July 1, 2007 that Court announced that it was returning to eleven-judge en banc panels.

Either the judges decided that the fifteen-judge en banc decisions simply weren’t sufficiently wacky to be worth perpetuating; or they didn’t like one another that much to be spending so much extra time together as a group; or the chief judge (the only member of the Ninth Circuit guaranteed a seat on every single en banc panel) recognized that having one vote out of fifteen simply wasn’t as wonderful as having one vote out of eleven.

But, on a more serious note, I’d like to hear via email ( [email protected]) from any readers who wish to address some or all of the following points: (1) has the Ninth Circuit given any official reason for why it has decided to eliminate fifteen-judge en banc panels and return to eleven-judge en banc panels; (2) what do you think brought about the change; and (3) what are your views on the change?

“May a Trial Court Force the Parties to Waive Appellate Review?” You can access at this link this week’s installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com.

“Bill attempts to protect dead stars’ images; A state Senate bill would give control of dead celebrities’ likenesses to the heirs the stars had chosen; Opponents predict legal challenges”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Islamic charity’s terror trial starts soon; Defendants will get their first chance to dispute charges that the group supported Hamas”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Dealing With Sins of the Forefathers: Md. Torn Over Statues of Justice in Dred Scott Case.” The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “It is perhaps surprising that Dred Scott Madison II and J. Charles Taney should agree. After all, Madison’s great-great-grandfather was a slave who went to court to sue for his freedom. And Taney’s great-great-uncle was the U.S. Supreme Court chief justice who wrote the opinion refusing to release that slave and ruling that black men held no rights in the United States. Yet as activists urge Maryland officials to remove bronze images of Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney from the State House in Annapolis and Frederick City Hall this year — the 150th anniversary of the Dred Scott decision — Taney and Madison have found a measure of agreement.”

And last Tuesday, The Baltimore Sun published an article headlined “Taney’s tainted legacy: Some in Frederick want to remove a bust from City Hall because of racist ‘Dred Scott’ decision.” And in yesterday’s newspaper, columnist C. Fraser Smith had an op-ed entitled “Words that will never die.”

“Pistachios at Guantanamo”: Columnist Jackson Diehl has this op-ed today in The Washington Post.

“Right Urges Showdown With Democrats Over Judicial Nominees”: The Washington Post contains this article today.

“Giving Evil the Eye: Juries Don’t Always Know Heinous Crimes When They See Them, But This Might Help.” This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Pakistan’s Chief Justice Back at Work”: The Associated Press provides this report.

Happy birthday to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy: According to the “Today in History” feature from The Associated Press, he turns 71 today.

“The Southwick Stonewall”: The Wall Street Journal today contains an editorial (paid subscription required) that begins, “It isn’t easy to get Republican moderate Senator Arlen Specter into a fighting partisan mood. But Democrats are achieving this rare feat as they continue to block nearly every nomination by President Bush to the federal appeals courts.”

“Contempt and Congress: The Democrats’ attack on executive privilege shows blatant disregard for the Constitution.” Law Professor John Yoo has this op-ed (free access) today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Reversals”: In “The Talk of the Town” section of the July 30, 2007 issue of The New Yorker, Nicholas Lemann has an essay in which he writes, “Just before the end of the past term, the Court issued a decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, that signalled a complete departure from more than half a century of jurisprudence on race.”