“Closing the Doors The Family Opened; A.V.’s Regulars Return to Wait For a Last Meal”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “Waiters were rolling out of the kitchen with steaming platters of rigatoni and mushroom-topped pizzas, the phone was jangling with more and more orders, and who was that coming through the timeworn front door? Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, leading an entourage for a last gastronomic adventure. For more than a half-century, the justice has been a regular patron at A.V. Ristorante Italiano, Washington’s one-stop answer to Little Italy since the days when Harry S. Truman occupied the White House. Now, he’ll have to find another joint.”

“Thomas Charts a Jurisprudence All His Own”: Brent Kendall has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.

“Throw Restraint to the Wind: And other ways for the legal left to rein in the Roberts Court.” Emily Bazelon has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Lawyer seeks contempt order against JCPS for race policy”: The Louisville Courier-Journal provides a news update that begins, “Jefferson County Public Schools officials should allow students assigned to schools this year because of their race to choose another school — or be held in contempt and incarcerated, says the Louisville lawyer who successfully sued to end the district’s school-integration plan.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Lawyer Asks for Changes in Schools Case.”

“Judge rules Hazleton’s ordinance on illegal immigrants is unconstitutional”: The Philadelphia Inquirer provides a news update that begins, “In a ruling with national implications, a federal judge this afternoon struck down a controversial year-old ordinance in Hazleton designed to crack down on illegal immigrants in the Northeastern Pennsylvania city. In a 206-page ruling, U.S. District Judge James Munley found that Hazleton’s ordinance that would have penalized city businesses that hire illegal immigrants and landlords who rent to them was unconstitutional because the federal government alone crafts and enforces immigration policies.”

The Allentown Morning Call provides news updates headlined “Appeals next in Hazleton case; Judge strikes ordinance regulating illegal aliens” and “Hazleton’s Latinos pleased with judge’s decision.”

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette provides a news update headlined “Judge strikes down Hazleton laws on illegal immigrants.”

The Associated Press reports that “Pa. Immigrant Law Voided.”

And The Legal Intelligencer provides a news update headlined “Hazleton Immigration Ordinances Fail Constitutional Test” (free access).

You can access today’s lengthy ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania at this link.

Washington Nationals 7, Philadelphia Phillies 6: My son and I were back at Citizens Bank Park for this afternoon’s game, but the Phillies were unable to deliver a bottom of the 9th comeback for the second day in a row, falling a run short today. You can view the box score at this link, while wraps from MLB.com are available here and here. Even worse news was awaiting us on our return home, as MLB.com is now reporting that “Utley breaks hand, lands on DL; Injury a result of being plunked with a pitch.”

“Congress has not stated its intent to reach discussions held in the United States in furtherance of a conspiracy to possess controlled substances outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, with intent to distribute those controlled substances outside of the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.” Federal criminal statutes that make it a crime to conspire to possess with intent to distribute cocaine do not apply extraterritorially, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has ruled today in a decision that you can access here.

David Oscar Markus has this post about the decision at the “Southern District of Florida Blog.”

“[B]ecause Appellants were members of a class asserted in a class action complaint, their limitations period was tolled under the doctrine of American Pipe until such time as they ceased to be members of the asserted class, notwithstanding that they also filed individual actions prior to the class certification decision.” So holds a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in a decision issued today in In re: WorldCom Securities Litigation.

The plaintiffs-appellants that prevailed in today’s ruling are are public and private pension funds that purchased bonds of WorldCom and then sued the underwriters of the bonds under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, alleging that the registration statements covering the bonds they purchased contained false and misleading information.

“Sixth Circuit reverses extreme upward variance in sex offender case”: The “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog has this post about a decision that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.

“‘Gang’ Courted for Southwick”: Roll Call today contains an article (subscription required) that begins, “GOP Senate leaders are looking to re-enlist members of the bipartisan ‘Gang of 14’ to help break the impasse over the stalled appellate court nomination of Leslie Southwick, a move that has temporarily delayed Republican plans to make the appointee ground zero for a major Senate rematch over the federal bench.”

“Stacking the Court”: Jean Edward Smith has this op-ed today in The New York Times.

“Senator May Seek Gonzales Perjury Probe; Leahy Sets Deadline For Revised Testimony”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Court tosses out challenge to board prayers”: The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana today contains an article that begins, “A sharply divided 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans threw out on Wednesday a 2-year-old lower court decision that had blocked prayers from being said at Tangipahoa Parish School Board meetings, court records show. The parties that brought the lawsuit against the board did not show they had standing to file suit against the School Board three and a half years ago, the appeals court majority said. The en banc court vacated the District Court ruling that held sectarian invocations delivered at the start of board meetings were unconstitutional. The 5th Circuit remanded the case to U.S. District Court at New Orleans with instructions to dismiss the suit, court records show.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court vacates Tangipahoa prayer ruling.”

You can access yesterday’s 8-7 en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link. And my coverage of the original splintered three-judge panel ruling in the case can be accessed here.

Philadelphia Phillies 7, Washington Nationals 5 (14 innings): My son and I had the pleasure of watching the first twelve innings of Wednesday night’s baseball game at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia. We would have gladly stayed for the entire game, but having taken public transportation to the game, it made more sense to leave before Philadelphia’s subway system shut down for the night.

On the night of the Cole Hamels Bobble Figurine give-away, starting pitcher Cole Hamels pitched seven strong innings, giving up only two runs and recording six strikeouts. When he left the game the Phillies were leading 4-2. Phillies closer for-the-moment Antonio Alfonseca had a rough outing in the ninth inning, charged with giving up three runs in just one-third of an inning. That meant, heading into the bottom of the ninth inning, that the Philies were trailing 5-4. With two outs in the bottom of the ninth, Phillies shortstop Jimmy Rollins hit a triple to the gap in left center and then came around to score the tying run on the play when the throw from the outfield to the Nationals shortstop trickled away and then the throw home could not be handled by the Nationals catcher.

Some five innings later, in the bottom of the fourteenth inning, Phillies first baseman Ryan Howard hit a tremendous home run to the second deck in right field, with a runner on base, to end the game. You can access the box score at this link. Wraps from MLB.com are here and here. Thursday’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “Phillies win in 14th on Howard’s homer.” And Thursday’s edition of The Washington Post contains an article headlined “Nats Let One Slip Away; Howard’s Homer in 14th Sinks Washington: Phillies 7, Nationals 5.”

“You’re NOT the Boss of Me: It’s hard to shock them in Las Vegas, but a former law clerk is managing to do just that.” The August 2007 issue of ABA Journal magazine contains an article that begins, “At first glance, the quo warranto matter of Halverson v. Hardcastle before the Nevada Supreme Court looks like a civics lesson on how much authority a state court’s chief judge has over colleagues. But just a few flips into the hundreds of pages of pleadings, exhibits and affidavits–including formerly confidential documents circulated among judges, ad­ministrators and staff–there is a nasty battle involving a newly elected judge who figuratively turned the courthouse upside down, then literally got banned from it and locked out.”

“Jury panel queried in masturbation trial”: The Miami Herald provides a news update that begins, “A Broward prisoner on trial on charges that he masturbated in his jail cell will face a jury of his peers. During jury selection Wednesday in the case of inmate Terry Lee Alexander, all seven jurors admitted to attorneys that they have masturbated. The awkward questioning was posed by defense attorney Kathleen McHugh, who faced 17 prospective jurors and asked point-blank who among them had never masturbated. No hands went up. Then, she went one-by-one, asking each prospective juror if he or she had ever masturbated. All nine men said yes, two of the 10 women said no.”

And The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports today that “Prisoner accused of indecent act alone in Broward jail cell.”

“Profits vs. Partners”: David Lat has this article in the July 29, 2007 issue of The New York Observer.

“Composite images can be child pornography, court rules”: The Akron Beacon Journal provides a news update that begins, “Composite images of child pornography are still pornography, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled today in a case stemming from the arrest of Portage County man.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link. And the court’s summary of its decision is headlined “Court Rules Child Pornography Laws Constitutional, Clarifies Burden of Proof that Real Child Is Depicted.”

“Domestic violence prosecution not in conflict with state’s ‘gay marriage’ amendment, state court rules”: The Toledo Blade provides this news update.

The Cincinnati Enquirer provides a news update headlined “Court rejects challenge.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Domestic Violence Law Upheld Under Ban.”

My earlier coverage of today’s Supreme Court of Ohio ruling appears in the post immediately below.

“High court upholds Ohio’s domestic-violence law; Gay-marriage ban doesn’t affect it, 6 justices say”: The Columbus Dispatch provides a news update that begins, “Ohio’s domestic-violence law applies to unmarried couples despite the state’s 2004 constitutional ban of gay marriages, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled today. Lower courts across Ohio had issued contradictory rulings on whether the 3-year-old amendment overturned domestic-violence statutes. By a large majority voters had agreed not only to define marriage as only between a man and woman, but also to mandate that the state and its political subdivisions could not ‘create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.’ In a 6-1 ruling, the court said the domestic-violence law is not trying to define a legal relationship, but merely identifies one class of people who are protected from violence.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link. And the court’s summary of its decision is headlined “Law Barring Domestic Violence Against Unmarried Person ‘Living As a Spouse’ Held Constitutional.”

“Origin Myth: How Liberals Can Take Back The Supreme Court.” Douglas T. Kendall and Law Professor James E. Ryan will have this essay in the August 6, 2007 issue of The New Republic.

“Specter to probe Supreme Court decisions”: The Politico today provides a report that begins, “Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) plans to review the Senate testimony of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel A. Alito to determine if their reversal of several long-standing opinions conflicts with promises they made to senators to win confirmation.”

“Timber fight pits judge vs. judges; Sen. Smith’s brother blasts decisions, then faces blowback”: The Oregonian today contains this article reporting on a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on July 2, 2007.

“What Should a Three-Judge U.S. Court of Appeals Panel Do When Faced With Conflicting On-Point Authority Issued By Previous Panels?” That was the headline of the October 2003 installment of my monthly “Upon Further Review” column published in The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

To my knowledge, today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is the only federal appellate court that allows a three-judge panel, when faced with conflicting precedent from earlier three-judge panels of its court, to choose to follow whichever of the two conflicting decisions the current panel deems more correct. In every other federal court of appeals, the earliest of the conflicting decisions governs until overruled by the court sitting en banc.

I view the Eighth Circuit’s approach to intra-circuit conflicts as flawed for the reasons discussed in my column from October 2003. What makes this issue relevant now is that a three-judge Eighth Circuit panel in an opinion issued today once again relied on this quirk of Eighth Circuit law to ignore an earlier-issued on-point Eighth Circuit panel ruling in favor of following a conflicting more recently-issued three-judge panel ruling.

Here’s hoping that the Eighth Circuit grants rehearing en banc in the case to eliminate the uncertainty in the important area of the law addressed in today’s decision that the decision only serves to perpetuate.

By a vote of 8-6, en banc Sixth Circuit upholds death sentence that original divided three-judge panel had set aside as unconstitutionally disproportionate: You can access today’s ruling, and the three dissenting opinions that accompany it, at this link.

The original three-judge panel’s ruling, which set aside the death sentence, issued on August 2, 2006, and my coverage that day of the ruling can be accessed here.

“Senators Attack Attorney General Gonzales’ Credibility”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Holy Land case starts with focus on intent; Lawyers insist 5 strived to ease suffering; prosecutors say goal was to fund terror”: The Dallas Morning News contains this article today.

Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Case Against Islamic Charity Opens; Now-Shuttered Organization Funneled Money to Militants, Prosecutors Say.”

And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Trial begins for charity tied to Hamas; The Holy Land Foundation’s mission was humanitarian aid to Palestinians, not funding violence, defense lawyers say.”

“A Return to Abuse: President Bush authorizes secret — and harsh — interrogation methods for the CIA.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.

“Court Voids Higher Limits on Truckers’ Hours”: The New York Times contains this article today.

You can access yesterday’s D.C. Circuit ruling at this link.

“Gonzales, Senators Spar on Credibility; Account of Meeting In ’04 Is Challenged”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post, along with an article headlined “Report Suggests Laws Broken in Attorney Firings.” Dana Milbank’s “Washington Sketch” column is headlined “With Senate and Gonzales, Familiarity Breeds Contempt.” And an editorial is entitled “Credibility Collapse: Once again, Alberto Gonzales is unable to offer straight answers to simple questions.”

The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Gonzales loses ground on the Hill; His explanations leave senators questioning his candor and honesty.”

The New York Times reports that “Gonzales Denies Improper Pressure on Ashcroft.”

USA Today reports that “Gonzales denies coercing Ashcroft; His account conflicts with ex-deputy’s.”

And The Washington Times reports that “Senators hit Gonzales’ credibility.”

“Students, schools fear end of racial diversity”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “Seventeen-year-old Quantae Williams doesn’t understand why the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his school district’s racial diversity program. He now dreads the prospect of leaving his mixed-race high school in suburban Louisville and returning to the poor black downtown schools where he used to get in fights.”

“Ban on Kangaroo Hides Puzzles Australians Here”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Although bald eagle on the menu would seem unthinkable in the United States, in Australia the formerly endangered kangaroo is commonly found as barbecued kebabs or stir fried with vegetables. When the California Supreme Court on Monday effectively banned the sale of kangaroo leather soccer shoes in deciding a lawsuit, Australians here asked why. ‘Kangaroos are like rabbits in Australia,’ said Kalee StClair, who is from Sydney and has lived here for more than four years. ‘They’re not protected at all, and it’s actually encouraged to kill them.”

“States ease laws that punish teens for sex with underage partners; Push on for prosecution of predators — not young ‘Romeos and Juliets'”: This front page article appears today in USA Today.

“Should Pro-Choice and Pro-Life Approaches to Reproductive Rights Carry an ‘Incest Exception’?” Sherry F. Colb has this essay today at FindLaw.

“Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer at the Aspen Institute”: C-SPAN describes this past Saturday’s broadcast (RealPlayer required) of “America & the Courts” as follows, “Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer discusses Democracy and the Court with the New Republic’s Jeffrey Rosen at the Aspen Institute in Aspen, CO. He talks about the recent Supreme Court term and his dissent in the school integration cases.”

In addition, you can view the slightly longer entire event by clicking here (RealPlayer required).