See you in September! Since this blog began in May 2002, I have spent the final week in August each year on vacation. And this year will be no different. New posts will next appear here on Sunday, September 2nd. In the interim, you may find me here, here, here, here, here, here, or here.

“Petitioners’ Briefs Filed in Detainee Cases”: Yesterday evening, “SCOTUSblog” published a post that begins, “Lawyers for detainees at Guantanamo Bay filed merits briefs today in Boumediene v. Bush (06-1195) and Al Odah v. United States (06-1196).” You can view those briefs and related amicus briefs both at that post and also via this link.

“Fieger indicted: Illegal donations to Edwards alleged; Lawyer denies charges that include conspiracy, obstruction of justice.” This article appears today in The Detroit News, along with articles headlined “Flashy lawyer in spotlight again; From Kevorkian to ‘Jenny Jones’ cases and his own political battles, Fieger stirs controversy” and “Fieger’s troubles may hurt Edwards; Though officials say candidate had no role in the case, charges could damage message.” The newspaper also posted online this statement from attorney Geoffrey Fieger and the criminal indictment itself.

And The Detroit Free Press today contains an article headlined “U.S. vs. Fieger: He’s accused of illegal political donations; Attorney says he’s victim of witch hunt.” In addition, columnist Brian Dickerson has an op-ed entitled “Fieger’s pumped, ready for showdown.”

Available online from law.com: Shannon P. Duffy reports that “3rd Circuit Slashes Punitive Damages Award; Case involves occupational therapy firm’s tortious interference claims against a nursing home management company.” My earlier coverage of Thursday’s Third Circuit ruling appears at this link.

And in other news, “2nd Circuit Rules on Latest Post-‘Booker’ Issue; Federal appeals court finds notice not required in violation of release conditions.” You can access the ruling at this link.

“$2 billion refund back in play; FERC must revisit state energy crisis, appeals court rules”: This article appears today in The Sacramento Bee.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Ninth Circuit Court revives California bid for electricity refunds.”

Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. Must Reconsider Denial of Energy Crisis Refunds.”

And Reuters reports that “Californians could get $1.3 billion in energy ruling.”

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

“In an unusual move, federal judge seeks spot on state court”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“In Court Ruling, Noriega Is Cleared for Extradition to France”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

Today in The Miami Herald, Jay Weaver has an article headlined “Noriega extradition hearing can proceed; Former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, who is being released from a Miami-area prison next month, may soon be on his way to France to face money-laundering charges.”

And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Noriega is cleared for extradition; The former Panamanian dictator can be sent to France once he leaves U.S. prison, a federal judge rules.”

“Military Says It Can Repair Guantanamo Trial Defects”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “In an effort to revive the war crimes trials at Guantanamo, military prosecutors argued on Friday in a special appeals court that defects in their cases identified by two military judges in June could be repaired and that the prosecutions could proceed.”

The Toronto Star reports today that “Khadr case goes to new U.S. review commission.”

McClatchy Newspapers report that “U.S. urges military appeals court to let detainee’s case proceed.”

And today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Weekend Edition Saturday” contained an audio segment entitled “Detainee Appeals Court Hears First Case” (RealPlayer required).

“Justice for an ‘Enemy Combatant’: The case of a legal U.S. resident held without charge returns to federal court.” The Washington Post today contains an editorial that begins, “The decision by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on Wednesday to rehear the case of alleged enemy combatant Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri does not bode well for those the Bush administration has detained in the war on terrorism.”

“No rehearing in Summum case”: The Deseret Morning News today contains an article that begins, “The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver has denied a request for a larger rehearing on the issue of the Summum religious group’s ability to erect a display next to displays of the Ten Commandments in the city parks of Duchesne and Pleasant Grove. In a published opinion issued Friday evening, 10th Circuit judges were split 6-to-6 on whether to grant requests by Duchesne and Pleasant Grove cities to have all 12 of the 10th Circuit judges rehear the case.”

And The Salt Lake Tribune reports today that “Summum prevails in appeals court; Judges decline to reconsider decision backing display of Seven Aphorisms.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Tenth Circuit order appears at this link.

“Spying Program May Be Tested by Terror Case”: Adam Liptak will have this article Sunday in The New York Times.

“This case concerns the reasonable expectation of privacy associated with password-protected computers.” So began an opinion that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued on April 25, 2007. My earlier coverage of that ruling appears here. On Friday, the Tenth Circuit issued an order denying rehearing en banc in the case. The order notes that four judges had voted to grant rehearing en banc. Attached to the order is the divided three-judge panel’s original decision.

“Appeals court won’t review ruling on Summum faith’s display of Seven Aphorisms in park”: The Salt Lake Tribune provides a news update that begins, “The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today declined to reconsider earlier decisions that said parks are public forums and followers of the Summum faith have a right to display their Seven Aphorisms next to the Ten Commandments. In a rare occurrence, the full court split 6-6 on whether to agree to requests by Pleasant Grove and Duchesne to rehear their appeals concerning Summum’s right to erect its own monument in public parks. The tie vote lets stand rulings by a three-judge panel in favor of the Salt Lake City-based religious organization.”

Accompanying Friday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying rehearing en banc by an equally divided vote are two dissenting opinions, one concurring opinion, and the panel’s original rulings from April 2007.

“Judges asked to order the return of O.C. men’s pot; The medical marijuana users ask the state appellate court to order the return of the drug that doctors recommend they use for pain”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Role of Telecom Firms in Wiretaps Is Confirmed”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Spy chief’s disclosures stun Congress; McConnell is criticized for offering once-classified details about the wiretapping program in an interview.”

You can access the interview transcript at this link.

“Prosecutors Push to Resume War Crimes Trials”: The New York Times provides this news update.

Bob Egelko is reporting: In today’s edition of The San Francisco Chronicle, he has an article headlined “Lawyer: Spy boss undercuts security case by confirming AT&T role.”

And this afternoon, he has a news update headlined “Federal judge looking to move onto state appeals bench” that begins, “U.S. District Judge Martin Jenkins, whose current docket includes major cases on sex discrimination and global warming, said Friday that he has applied to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for a vacant position on the state appeals court in San Francisco. Jenkins, a former state trial judge in Oakland and a federal judge in San Francisco since 1997, verified a report by the National Law Journal that he has submitted an application for appointment to the First District Court of Appeal. He declined further comment.”

“N.J. Top Court to Decide Scope of Protection for Sports Spectators”: law.com provides this report.

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “New Appeals Court Mulls ‘Enemy Combatant’ Labels” and “Ex-Dictator Noriega In Limbo as Release Looms.”

“Judge won’t block Noriega’s extradition”: Jay Weaver of The Miami Herald provides a news update that begins, “A federal judge Friday denied former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega’s request to halt his extradition to France on money-laundering charges related to his drug conviction in Miami. U.S. District Judge William Hoeveler rejected the former general’s argument that because the judge had designated him as a prisoner of war after his sentencing in 1992, he was entitled to be returned to Panama under the Geneva Convention.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Judge Won’t Halt Noriega Extradition.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida at this link.

“Phone call fateful in Padilla conviction; Jurors in Jose Padilla’s terrorism trial saw him as a bit player in a South Florida conspiracy to support jihad abroad, but convicted him based on a single phone call”: This article appears today in The Miami Herald.

“Fieger, law partner indicted in campaign case; Former Fieger attorney says: ‘It’s going to be the battle of the titans.'” The Detroit News provides an update that begins, “A federal grand jury has indicted Southfield attorney Geoffrey Fieger and his law partner Vernon (Ven) Johnson of conspiring to make illegal campaign contributions to presidential candidate John Edwards’ 2004 campaign. The indictment was unsealed today in U.S. District Court in Detroit. A grand jury, which works in secret, had returned it under seal on Tuesday, officials said. The 30-page, 10-count indictment charges Fieger with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, making illegal campaign contributions and causing false statements.”

The Detroit Free Press provides a news update headlined “Fieger, partner indicted on campaign finance charges.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Ex-Kevorkian Atty Charged Over Donations.”

You can access the indictment, unsealed today, at this link.

“White House Defends US Terror Tribunals”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Bush administration argued Friday that discrepancies between the nation’s new terror law and the way it is being carried out should not stall one of the Pentagon’s first terrorism trials. Arguing before the newly formed U.S. Court of Military Commission Review, government attorneys urged judges to look beyond the letter of the law when deciding whether the military undermined its terrorism tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.”

“Judge to rule Monday on Missouri abortion law”: The Kansas City Star today contains an article that begins, “A federal judge announced Thursday that he will decide by 5 p.m. Monday whether to delay enforcement of a new Missouri law regulating abortion clinics.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Planned Parenthood Seeks to Halt Mo. Law.”

“Schlozman Leaves Justice Dept. Amid Questions”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Suit over Fulton strip searches can go forward; Seven former jail detainees may sue; court requires reasonable cause for such searches”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides this news update about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

“The broader question this argument presents is whether, and if so when, a panel of this Court may vary from a specific holding of an earlier one based on the reasoning the Supreme Court used to reach a later decision on a different issue.” Eleventh Circuit Judge Ed Carnes issued a very interesting concurring opinion today addressing that question.

“Before us are cross-appeals arising from the reduction of a $30 million punitive damages verdict to $2 million.” So states the opinion that the majority on a divided three-judge Third Circuit panel issued today. The majority further reduced the punitive damages award to $750,000, while the dissent laments the difficulty in discerning the “spirit” of an appellate court’s mandate.

“Source: Vick will not admit to killing dogs or gambling on dog fights.” ESPN.com provides this news update.

“[A]s a matter of first impression, we must decide whether, or under what circumstances, appellate attorney’s fees are ‘costs on appeal’ that a district court may require an appellant to secure in a bond ordered under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 7”: A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this decision today.

The decision also addresses whether a district court may include in a Rule 7 bond appellate attorney’s fees that might be awarded by the court of appeals if that court holds that the appeal is frivolous under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.

“Federal Circuit Will Change Its Web Page Address and Domain Name Effective October 1, 2007”: The old web site provides the details here, while the new web site is not yet up and running.

Three-judge Eighth Circuit panel affirms federal district court’s rejection of claims that that Missouri law violates the Equal Protection Clause; Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by disqualifying persons under court-ordered guardianship from voting: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

Second Circuit affirms criminal conviction under federal Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992 for illegally importing black sparrowhawks: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

“We hold that the actual-malice standard applies to Compuware’s breach of contract claim because the contract pertains solely to the publication of protected speech, the claim exclusively relies on arguments grounded in negligence and vague implied contractual duties, and the plaintiff has not suffered a contractual injury but complains only of reputational or defamation-type harm.” A lawsuit that plaintiff Compuware Corporation filed against defendant Moody’s Investors Services Inc. produced this interesting ruling today by a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The dissenting opinion begins, “The extension of First Amendment tort law principles to contract cases is unwarranted and entirely unprecedented, except for a lone bankruptcy court case.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Court Clears Way for Whole Foods Merger” and “Court to Rehear Enemy Combatant Case.”