“When in Doubt, Look to Roberts for Outcome of Supreme Court Cases”: law.com’s Tony Mauro has an article reporting that “in 23 of the 25 5-4 decisions, Roberts asked more questions of the side he voted against than the side he favored.”

Adult bookstore’s challenge to zoning ordinance of Dickinson County, Kansas to result in a trial over disputed secondary effects of adult businesses on surrounding communities: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued this interesting ruling today.

“Is There A Middle Ground On Race?” Stuart Taylor Jr. has this essay in this week’s issue of National Journal.

“Ethics Charges Filed Against Mass. Judge”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A state commission filed ethics charges Tuesday against a judge who won a $2 million libel award from the Boston Herald, accusing him of misconduct for writing threatening and intimidating letters to the newspaper’s publisher.”

The charges and the judge’s response thereto can be accessed at this link.

Do false statements made to a probation officer preparing a criminal defendant’s presentence report constitute “false statements submitted to a judge by a party to a judicial proceeding” for purposes of an exception to criminal liability under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1001? A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this very interesting decision today.

Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber‘s majority opinion, in which Circuit Judge Harry Pregerson joined, concludes:

Defendant’s false statement to a probation officer was submitted, as required by law, to the district court in the presentence report, in connection with a judicial proceeding to which he was a party. The statement falls within the exemption from criminal liability codified in 18 U.S.C. §1001(b). We therefore reverse the district court’s denial of Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment and remand with instructions to vacate Defendant’s conviction and sentence.

Circuit Judge Pamela Ann Rymer issued a dissenting opinion in which she reasons, “Yet if the defendant submits to an interview, and makes a statement, he makes the statement to a probation officer; if he lies, he lies to the probation officer, not ‘to the judge.'”

“In 1996, David H. Dixon lost his job as a teacher at Cumberland High School in Harlan County, Kentucky after the revelation that he had taken topless photographs of S.C., one of his female students.” So begins a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.

Dunkin Donuts may regret going whole hog on this particular franchisee: Might it constitute racial discrimination to require a Palestinian Arab of the Muslim faith to sell pork products at his Dunkin Donuts franchise? A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit answers “yes” in a ruling issued today.

Can a person’s nephew functionally be that person’s son? Who says immigration rulings never give rise to interesting questions? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this ruling today.

“Conservatives Fear 4th Circuit Is Slipping Away; Inaction from the White House and gridlock on the Hill leave four slots sitting vacant”: When I previously linked to this article, it was located behind the new, yet quite annoying, free registration wall now in existence at the web site of Legal Times. Today, law.com has reposted the article at this link in a manner that makes it freely accessible to all, no registration required.

Linguistic Help 4 Supreme Court: Is the message “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS” reasonably understood to encourage illegal drug use — as a majority on the U.S. Supreme Court held in a ruling issued last month and as I likewise agree — or is the message meaningless gibberish — as the student who displayed a banner containing the message has argued?

In a post titled “The Supreme Court Fails Semantics” at “Language Log,” Bill Poser has a post concluding that “[t]he Court was therefore wrong in finding that the banner advocates the use of marijuana.” The Supreme Court’s majority and I, on the other hand, view the message as containing an implied imperative.

Thanks to “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” for the pointer.

“Bad Heir Day: How Sandra Day O’Connor became the least powerful jurist in America.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Justice Talking Supreme Court Review”: This installment of the public radio program “Justice Talking” will be recorded this evening at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Although my schedule does not allow me to attend the event, I will be having lunch today with one of the panelists.

“Appeals judge to free couple in slave case”: The New York Daily News today contains an article that begins, “The wealthy Long Island couple accused of torturing two housekeepers and holding them as virtual slaves in their Muttontown mansion will go free before their September trial. A Manhattan federal appeals court overruled Judge Thomas Platt’s decision to keep Varsha Sabhnani, 35, and her husband, Mahender Sabhnani, 51, locked up despite their offer to post a multimillion-dollar bail package. The 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals sent the case back to Platt after deciding the couple had agreed to ‘extraordinary’ physical conditions that will ensure they show up for trial. The Sabhnanis will pay for a private security force to keep an eye on them 24 hours a day. And their bail package, secured by cash and property, has been increased by $1 million to $4.5 million.”

Newsday reports today that “Judges order bail plan for couple on slavery charges; But pair accused of enslaving workers still has difficult road to work out conditions.”

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Court: Bail for Couple Accused of Slaves.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

“Bush won’t cooperate in attorneys case; The president, asserting executive privilege, refuses to allow testimony and documents in a probe of the dismissals”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

The New York Times reports today that “Bush Won’t Deliver Aides in Prosecutor Case.”

The Washington Post reports that “New Privilege Claim by Bush Escalates Clash Over Firings.”

USA Today reports that “Hearings on firings likely to get silent treatment; Ex-aides told not to respond.”

And The Wall Street Journal reports that “Privilege Fight With Bush Poses Risk for Congress; To Discontented Voters, Lawmakers May Seem Too Focused on Probes” (temporary free access).

“Ex-Partner at Milberg Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Lawyer admits to kickbacks; Class-action attorney’s plea could help the U.S. snag a bigger fish.”

The Washington Post reports that “Guilty Plea Puts Pressure On Firm; Ex-Milberg Weiss Official to Pay Fine, Help Government.”

Josh Gerstein of The New York Sun reports that “Big Tort Lawyer Turns State’s Evidence.”

USA Today reports that “Plea may aid case against law partners; Milberg Weiss famous for class action lawsuits.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that “Former Milberg Partner May Help U.S. Build Case” (temporary free access).

And law.com reports that “Milberg Weiss’ Bershad Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy in Kickback Plan; Name partner at securities plaintiffs law firm agrees to cooperate and to forfeit $7.75 million.”

“Porn-viewing curbs urged; Delco man faces perv counts”: The Philadelphia Daily News today contains an article that begins, “A federal judge yesterday ordered the attorney for John Jackey Worman, of Delaware County, charged in January with multiple counts of manufacturing child porn, to file court papers by Monday on why his client should be permitted to view an unlimited number of child-porn images he allegedly made.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports today that “Child-porn defendant seeks freer access to his videos.”

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Feds: Defense Atty. Abused Porn Evidence.”

“Court to hear arguments in ‘light’ smokes case”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “Several major tobacco companies are set to go to a U.S. appellate court on Tuesday to argue about whether a $200 billion lawsuit against them by ‘light’ cigarette smokers should proceed as a class action.”

“Gonzales Was Told of FBI Violations; After Bureau Sent Reports, Attorney General Said He Knew of No Wrongdoing”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Senate rejects Brownback’s concerns about judge”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “The U.S. Senate on Monday confirmed as a federal judge a woman who attended a same-sex commitment ceremony, overwhelmingly rejecting the concerns of a Republican senator running for the White House. The vote was 83-4 in favor of elevating Michigan state judge Janet Neff to federal district court.”

“Reviving Title VII’s Protection Against Pay Discrimination In the Wake of the Supreme Court’s Harsh Decision: A Call for Congressional Action.” Joanna Grossman and Deborah Brake today have this essay online at FindLaw.

“Senate OKs Judge Who Attended Gay Union”: The Associated Press provides this report. This evening, the U.S. Senate approved the nomination of Janet T. Neff to be a U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Michigan by a vote of 83-4. You can access at this link The New York Times wedding announcement that gave rise to the controversy.

“State Supreme Court moves up Genarlow Wilson hearing”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides a news update that begins, “The Georgia Supreme Court has voted to hold a hearing more than two months earlier than originally planned in the case of a Douglas County man who is serving a 10-year prison sentence for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. A hearing is now set in Genarlow Wilson’s case for July 20 at 10 a.m.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Court Expedites Appeal in Teen Sex Case.”

“A controversy is brewing over Snapple labels; Suit disputes ‘all natural’ claim”: This article appeared last Friday in The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger.

“He Says He Owns the Word ‘Stealth’ (Actually, He Claims ‘Chutzpah,’ Too)”: A little over two years ago — on July 4, 2005 — The New York Times published an article that begins, “Can a man own a word? And can he sue to keep other people from using it? Over the last few years, Leo Stoller has written dozens of letters to companies and organizations and individuals stating that he owns the trademark to ‘stealth.’ He has threatened to sue people who have used the word without his permission. In some cases, he has offered to drop objections in exchange for thousands of dollars. And in a few of those instances, people or companies have paid up.”

One such lawsuit today resulted in a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. And the lead defendant being sued for using the word “stealth” to market a product happens to be Hall of Fame baseball legend George Brett, whose company sells a wooden baseball bat that is called “Stealth” (sixth item).

Because the case involves George Brett and baseball bats — and because today’s decision was written by Circuit Judge Terence T. Evans, who is one of the Seventh Circuit’s most avid sports fans — it comes as no surprise that the opinion begins with a thoughtful remembrance of the pine tar incident. Judge Evans’s opinion provides a link to this YouTube clip of the incident. Other coverage is available from MLB.com (here and here) and ESPN.com.

For TimesSelect subscribers, much additional coverage can be accessed via the web site of The New York Times: “Brett Homer Nullified, So Yankees Win“; “Fans Savor Game’s Fine Print“; “A Piece of Wood is Much Coveted“; “Kansas City Wins Protest on Canceled Homer“; “Text of League President’s Ruling in Brett Bat Case“; “Angry Yankees Defend the Rules and Umpires“; “How Baseball Became Unstuck by a Rules Dispute“; “Resumed Game Ends in 5-4 Yankee Loss to Royals“; “Anger Dies; Bat Lives On“; and “The Pine-Tar Incident: 10 Years Ago Brett Lost His Grip and a Home Run.”

“Bush Denies Congress Access to Aides; Move Sets Up Showdown With Congress Over Executive Power”: The Washington Post provides this news update.

The New York Times provides a news update headlined “Bush Denies Congress Access to Aides.”

The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “White House says it won’t hand over documents on attorney firings.”

Reuters reports that “W. House dares Congress to fight in court.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Bush Directs Ex-Aides Not to Testify About Firings.”

And The Associated Press provides this report.

You can access the “Communication to Congress on President’s Assertion of Executive Privilege” at this link.

“When court’s out, school’s in for Supreme Court justices”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers provides this report.

The White House offers its views on the permissibility of having I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby serve his sentence of supervised release even though his sentence of imprisonment has been commuted: You can view the letter from White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding — dated Friday, July 6, 2007 but filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia today — at this link.

“Former Texas Supreme Court Justice John Hill dies”: The Houston Chronicle provides this news update.

And The Austin American-Statesman provides a news update headlined “John Hill, former Texas chief justice and attorney general, dies; A winner thrice, he became first Democratic nominee to lose for governor in 100 years.”

“Woman Sues Porn Star Over Name”: KPRC Local 2 of Houston provides this report.

“Crater first raises a frontal attack on the constitutionality of AEDPA. He claims that … a provision of AEDPA limiting the grounds for federal habeas relief for prisoners convicted in state court, violates the Suspension Clause and interferes with the independence of federal courts under Article III.” A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today issued this decision rejecting those challenges.

Obviousness and “the discovery that blood from a newborn infant’s umbilical cord is a rich source of a type of stem cells useful for rebuilding an individual’s blood and immune system after that system has been compromised”: A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today issued this 76-page decision in a patent dispute.

“Did a Federal Appeals Court Avoid Tackling the Real Issues Behind Football Fan’s Lawsuit? 11th Circuit rules that season ticket-holder can’t object to being searched upon entering stadium.” Today’s installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed at this link.

“Epic Battle Shapes Up in Capital; A Test of Privilege for White House”: Josh Gerstein has this article today in The New York Sun.

“Police stifle bill on discipline hearings access”: The San Francisco Chronicle today contains an article that begins, “Legislation that would increase Californians’ access to police disciplinary records by rolling back a 2006 state Supreme Court ruling appears to be dead for the year — the victim of formidable law enforcement opposition.”

“Sex, lies and audiotapes: Douglas prosecutor crossed a line when he tried to intimidate mother of teen in Wilson case.” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution today contains an editorial that begins, “At a basic level, the Genarlow Wilson case and the ensuing controversy represent the consequences of crossing boundaries.”