“European Court Strikes Down ‘Volkswagen Law'”: The New York Times provides a news update that begins, “The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg today struck down a 47-year-old German law that was the only roadblock standing between Porsche and its long-sought goal of taking over Volkswagen.”
The Wall Street Journal provides a news update headlined “EU Court Overturns Law That Shields Volkswagen.”
BBC News provides reports headlined “‘Volkswagen law’ is ruled illegal; The European Union’s highest court has said a German law protecting carmaker Volkswagen from takeovers is illegal” and “Porsche expected to take control of VW.”
The Telegraph (UK) provides a news update headlined “EU ruling may trigger Porsche bid for Volkswagen.”
Reuters reports that “EU’s top court strikes down VW law.”
And The Associated Press reports that “EU Court Strikes Down VW Law.”
You can access today’s ruling of the European Court of Justice at this link. That court today also issued a press release summarizing the ruling.
“The War for the Constitution : The anniversary of Robert Bork’s failed nomination reminds us what’s at stake in the coming election.” Gary L. McDowell has this op-ed today in The Wall Street Journal.
“Due Process for Exxon”: Today in The Wall Street Journal, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. has an op-ed that begins, “It has been nearly two decades since the Exxon Valdez ran aground in Alaska, spilling 258,000 barrels of crude oil. The company long ago paid dearly for the catastrophic accident: some $3.4 billion in clean-up costs, natural resource damages, claims payments, fines and penalties. Now the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered Exxon Mobil Corp. to pay $2.5 billion in punitive damages, the largest such award affirmed by a federal court in history.”
“A Former Florida Professor, Al-Arian, Again Rebuffed Over Contempt Citation”: Today in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article that begins, “A federal judge has rebuffed another bid by a former Florida college professor, Sami Al-Arian, to end a contempt of court citation stemming from his refusal to testify before a grand jury investigating Islamic charities in Virginia, one of Al-Arian’s daughters said yesterday.”
Available online from law.com: Jonathan Ringel reports that “Ginsburg Notes Israeli Judges’ Ban on Torture.”
In other news, “Rough Seas Forecasted for Mukasey: Can attorney general nominee pilot the Justice Department through turbulent waters?”
And this week’s installment of Tom Goldstein’s “Conference Call” column is headlined “Exxon Appeals Award to High Court; Justices consider challenge of a $2.5 billion decision.”
“The Second Circuit’s Stunning Reversal, in Two Suits Involving the Alien Tort Claims Act”: Anthony J. Sebok has this essay, part one of a two-part series, today at FindLaw.
“No Convictions in Trial Against Muslim Charity”: The New York Times provides a news update from Dallas that begins, “A deadlocked federal jury here did not convict any leaders of a Muslim charity who were charged with supporting Middle Eastern terrorists, and the judge today declared a mistrial in what has been widely viewed as the government’s flagship terror-financing case.”
And The Washington Post provides a news update headlined “Mistrial Declared in Muslim Charity Case; Holy Land Foundation Official Acquitted on Other Counts.”
“Microsoft drops appeal of European antitrust case; The software giant, which faces a $1 billion fine, will make some of its Windows operating system code available so developers can better design products for it”: Jim Puzzanghera of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.
The New York Times provides a news update headlined “Microsoft Concedes in European Antitrust Case.”
And The Washington Post provides a news update headlined “Microsoft Yields to EU Antitrust Ruling.”
“Canada Revises Indefinite Terror Jailing”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Canada’s government moved Monday to address a court ruling against one of its most contentious anti-terrorism measures, a law allowing authorities to detain foreign terrorism suspects indefinitely without disclosing evidence against them.”
Available online at Slate: Phillip Carter and Dahlia Lithwick have a jurisprudence essay entitled “All Wet: Why can’t we renounce waterboarding once and for all?”
And Frank Bowman has a jurisprudence essay entitled “From Toady to True Believer: How confirming Michael Mukasey will further cripple Congress.”
“FBI Coerced Confession Deemed ‘Classified'”: This post appears today at Slashdot.
At his “Political Animal” blog, Kevin Drum has a post titled “Redactions.”
Patterico is already up to his fourth update on a post titled “Was a Passage Omitted from a Recent Second Circuit Opinion for ‘Security’ Reasons — Or to Cover Up Material Embarrassing to the FBI?”
The blog “Appellate Law & Practice” has a post titled “Why not more about the Second Circuit’s censorship?”
And additional coverage can be accessed in the following linked posts at the blogs “Unqualified Offerings“; “Free Constitution“; “anotherpanacea“; and “A Second Hand Conjecture.”
If you ever wish to conclude your service as jurors in this criminal case, you the jury will return a unanimous verdict: An impermissibly coercive jury instruction constituted plain error and thus caused a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to vacate a criminal conviction in a decision issued today.
“Senate vote on Southwick nomination near; Dems may block judge’s confirmation”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article that begins, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Friday he would schedule a vote this week on the nomination of Mississippi Judge Leslie Southwick. Reid’s press secretary, Jim Manley, said the long-awaited vote could come as early as Tuesday.”
“Judge declares mistrial in Holy Land Foundation case; Jurors unable to reach unanimous decision on most counts”: The Dallas Morning News provides this update.
And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Mistrial Declared in Muslim Charity Case” that begins, “A judge declared a mistrial Monday for most former leaders of a Muslim charity accused of funding terrorism, after chaos broke out in the court when three jurors disputed the verdict that had been announced.”
“Holy Land Foundation defendants face mixed verdicts”: The Dallas Morning News provides an update that begins, “The original chairman and director of endowments of the Holy Land Foundation was found not guilty of supporting terrorism by sending money to charity committees controlled by Hamas. The jury in the terrorism-financing trial was unable to reach unanimous decisions on three of the six defendants, U.S. District Judge Joe Fish said Monday as he unsealed their verdicts.”
And The Associated Press reports that “Verdicts Unclear in Muslim Charity Case.”
A picture may be worth 1,000 words, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission has decided that a video is worth 75 still images: How can someone convicted of possessing child pornography in the form of 204 still images and 49 videos have his federal criminal sentence enhanced under a provision applicable to an offense that involved 600 or more images of child pornography? This ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today provides the answer.
On yesterday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Weekend Edition Sunday“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Supreme Court Reviews Lethal Injection Policy“; “Observers Watch Missouri Judge Selection Process“; “Lawmakers Question Mukasey on Ideas“; and “Mukasey Torture Testimony Weak” (commentary from Daniel Schorr).
RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
“Who are the bench’s judicial activists? Looking at the Supreme Court justices’ voting records, the lines between activism and restraint may surprise you.” Law Professors Thomas J. Miles and Cass R. Sunstein have this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Security tight for Holy Land verdict Monday; Marshals assigned to reading prepared for variety of factors, chief says”: The Dallas Morning News today contains an article that begins, “Security will be tight Monday around the federal courthouse in downtown Dallas as people gather to hear the verdict in the landmark Holy Land Foundation terror-finance trial at 10 a.m. Jurors announced Thursday that they had reached a decision in the case, but the verdict was sealed because U.S. District Judge A. Joe Fish was out of town last week.”
“Suing to Abolish Unpublished Appellate Court Rulings”: Today’s installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed here.
“Immunity demand for telecoms raises questions; As history shows, mass snooping can sweep up innocent citizens”: Today’s edition of USA Today contains this editorial.
In addition, Peter Hoekstra has an op-ed entitled “Shield the phone companies: Telecom carriers that aided war on terror deserve lawsuit immunity.”
“The Wiretap Deal: An intelligence victory, but a defeat for Presidential power.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal.
“Harry Potter and the Framers’ Intent”: Michael C. Dorf has this essay online at FindLaw.
“Blawg Review #131”: Hosted here by David Maister at the blog “Passion, People and Principles.”
“Say What You Like, Just Don’t Say It Here”: Monday’s edition of The New York Times will contain the new installment of Adam Liptak’s “Sidebar” column, which begins, “The American commitment to free speech is the most robust in the world. But these days that tolerance stops at the border.”
“High drama of appeals at new supreme court may go out on television”: Monday’s edition of The Times of London contains an article that begins, “Cameras will be allowed to broadcast hearings before Britain’s highest court when the new supreme court opens for business, The Times has learnt. Judges say that Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is keen to permit cameras into the court as part of the aim to make it more transparent. The move could see some of Britain’s most high-profile appeals being shown on television. Such appeals have included the legality of detaining terror suspects without trial, whether the deaths of six Iraqis at the hands of British soldiers was covered by the Human Rights Act, and the extradition of General Pinochet.”
“Procedural point gets pedophile’s case to high court; A Minnesota man convicted of sex abuse wants the Supreme Court to intervene because he never got to confront his accuser”: The Minneapolis Star Tribune on Monday will contain an article that begins, “Stephen Danforth has followed a twisted legal path from disbarred Minnesota attorney to test case for the right to confront an accuser. From the Prairie Correctional Facility in Appleton, Minn., where he is serving a 26-year term for sexually abusing a 6-year-old boy, he will follow a Supreme Court case he launched in his new incarnation as a jailhouse lawyer. His case, Danforth vs. State of Minnesota, will be heard before the U.S. Supreme Court later this month.”
The current issue of The Harvard Law Record is reporting: The publication contains articles headlined “Students Get a Sneak Peek at Supreme Court Term” and “Enemy Combatant Case Mooted at HLS.”
“Justice Bader-Ginsberg visits Atlanta, noting threats to women’s rights”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides this news update.
In other coverage, The Associated Press provides an article headlined “Justice: Abortion will always be accessible to ‘women of means.’”
And yesterday’s edition of The Asheville Citizen-Times reported that “On visit to Asheville, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg catches up with an old friend.”
“A Court Decision Elbows a Village in Favor of Religious Rights”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “It all began with an Indian who wanted to eat peyote. His name was Alfred Smith. He belonged to the Klamath tribe in Oregon and was a member of the North American Church, whose sacramental rites included ingesting peyote buds.”
“Justice Says Law Degree ‘Worth 15 Cents'”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has a 15-cent price tag stuck to his Yale law degree, blaming the school’s affirmative action policies in the 1970s for his difficulty finding a job after he graduated.”
“Was a Passage Omitted from a Recent Second Circuit Opinion for ‘Security’ Reasons — Or to Cover Up Material Embarrassing to the FBI?” Patterico has this post today at his blog, “Patterico’s Pontifications.”
“A tale of two decisions (or, how the FBI gets you to confess)”: Steve Bergstein has this interesting post today at his “PsychSound” blog.
At his other blog — “Wait A Second!” — Steve on Thursday and Friday of last week provided extensive coverage of the Second Circuit‘s issuance, withdrawal, and reissuance in redacted form of that court’s ruling in Higazy v. Templeton.
“Empty Seats on the Bench: Realistic nominations might get them filled.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.
Blog server issues: Both yesterday afternoon and again right now, this blog’s usual web server was and is offline. As a consequence, documents that I’ve previously uploaded to the web (which resides on the blog’s usual server) are temporarily unavailable. Some additional posts that I made last night were also temporarily unavailable overnight although they’ve been restored from back-up now. Eventually, everything will return to normal (as it did for a time last night), or so we can hope.
Update at 11:44 a.m.: This blog’s usual web server appears to be up and running once again, so all documents previously uploaded to the web should once again be accessible.
