“Young law school grad skips the bars and tries to pass the bar instead; Eighteen-year-old Kathleen Holtz has already been hired by a Century City firm; If she doesn’t fail the exam, she’ll be the youngest licensed lawyer in the nation”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “Other fledgling lawyers may toast the news that they’ve passed the bar exam by popping open a chilled bottle of champagne. Not Kathleen Holtz. When results of the most recent California bar exam are released next month, the 18-year-old law school grad will be too young to drink legally. And, as the youngest practicing attorney in California — if not the nation — Holtz is loath to break the law.”
“Trying to Decipher the State of the Death Penalty”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.
“Blogger Posts Opinion Withdrawn Over Security Concerns”: This report appears this morning at the ABA Journal, referring to this post of mine from yesterday afternoon.
Because I happen to be the blogger in question, I reproduce here the response I just dispatched to the email I received this morning from the author of the ABA Journal’s report:
The opinion had already been publicly issued by the Second Circuit on October 18, 2007, posted to the internet, viewed by hundreds if not thousands of individuals, and was in circulation via email among those interested in the case. The Higazy case is a case in which there is great public interest, and I received at least half a dozen emails alerting me to the opinion’s issuance yesterday morning.
I was unable to link to the opinion immediately because I was out of the office on client business until yesterday afternoon. When I returned to the office, the opinion had already been taken offline by the Second Circuit without any publicly-issued explanation. I therefore put a post on my blog asking if any of my readers had retained a copy and would be willing to email it to me so that I could return the decision to the internet, where the Second Circuit had originally placed it. Shortly thereafter, one of my regular email correspondents forwarded a PDF copy of the decision that the Second Circuit had posted earlier in the day to its web site.
No one from the Second Circuit has attempted to explain to me the so-called security concerns — which as far as I can tell based on my own analysis apparently arise from certain statements attributed to Mr. Higazy in the opinion’s factual recitation — that led the Second Circuit to remove the opinion from its web site after the opinion had been posted there for all to see and access. Regardless, the Second Circuit official who contacted me admitted that the court was in no position to attempt to retrieve every electronic copy of the decision that the public had downloaded from that court’s web site on October 18th, and thus it seemed clear to me that whatever security concerns there were had already been irreparably harmed by the Second Circuit’s apparently premature public release of the decision.
When I posted the opinion at the “How Appealing” blog, hosted by American Lawyer Media, a respected publisher of legal news, there was no explanation publicly available anywhere or privately available to me for why the Second Circuit had withdrawn the opinion. In my role as a member of the news media, I determined that it would be inappropriate to take down my posting of the decision based on a general claim that the opinion, issued earlier in the day to the public over the internet, referred to information contained in an appendix whose contents remained under seal.
If there is a lesson here, it is that courts should not make publicly available over their web sites decisions that they do not want to make available to the public, and if a court does so, there is no way to “undo” a decision’s public issuance.
The article from Josh Gerstein of The New York Sun reporting on the opinion’s issuance, which that newspaper posted online at 7:51 p.m. eastern time last night, can be accessed here.
“Mother of Olympic bomber Rudolph complains of son’s prison treatment”: Wednesday’s edition of The Chattanooga Times Free Press contained an article that begins, “The mother of convicted Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph said Tuesday her son is enduring inhumane treatment in a federal maximum security prison in Colorado where he is denied books and family visits and his mail is delayed for weeks. ‘They’re (the Federal Bureau of Prisons) a law unto themselves,’ Patricia Rudolph said in a phone interview. ‘They should be the ones behind bars.'”
You can access the letter that Patricia Rudolph sent to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons by clicking here.
“Clarence Thomas promotes new book in Atlanta; Journalists at luncheon raise questions about his success and others'”: This article appears today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
“Why, Even If You Have Nothing To Hide, Government Surveillance Threatens Your Freedom: The Case Against Expanding Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Powers.” John W. Dean has this essay today at FindLaw.
Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “Mukasey Refuses to Call Waterboarding Torture” and “Senate Committee Strikes Deal on Wiretaps.”
And today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “Mukasey Nomination Hearings Go Smoothly” (featuring Nina Totenberg).
RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.
Available online from law.com: Pamela A. MacLean has an interesting article headlined “Longtime Rebel Alex Kozinski Prepares to Lead the 9th Circuit.”
An article reports that “Justice Thomas Reflects on Path to the Supreme Court; Speaking in Atlanta, justice discusses early job hunt and how race and expectations affect perceptions of his Court opinions.”
In other news from Atlanta, “Judge in Courthouse Shooting Case Recuses From Contempt Hearing; Public defender council declares state-funded group cannot afford to represent courthouse shooting defendant.”
An article reports that “Pa. High Court to Review Its Underinsured Motorist Stacking Decision.”
And in other news, “Lerach’s Guilty Plea Gives Coke New Defense in Securities Fraud Case; Claim about lawyer’s tactics stems from shareholder litigation alleging Coke artificially inflated revenues and stock prices.”
“US defends its harsh treatment of an American citizen: The administration offers its legal rationale for the long detention of Jose Padilla.” Warren Richey will have this article Friday in The Christian Science Monitor.
I have posted online at this link the brief, which the federal government filed on Monday, that is the subject of Richey’s article.
“5 added to Mack juror panel”: The Reno Gazette-Journal today contains an article that begins, “Five more jurors were added Wednesday to the Las Vegas jury pool in the Darren Mack case, bringing the total prospective jury pool to 15.”
In news updates from The Houston Chronicle: An update headlined “Court hears arguments on BP blast testimony” begins, “A battle over whether former BP CEO John Browne should be forced to testify in a deposition about the deadly 2005 explosion at the company’s Texas City refinery reached the state Supreme Court today.”
And an update headlined “Blog ban on campus prompts lawsuit” begins, “Access to an Internet blog critical of the North Harris Montgomery Community College District’s chancellor is being barred from campus computers, a lawsuit says. Richard C. McDuffee filed suit in a Montgomery County district court claiming a violation of free speech.”
“Daniels Picked for High Court”: The Albuquerque Journal today contains an article that begins, “It wasn’t until he read a biography of crusading attorney Clarence Darrow that Charles Daniels decided to become a lawyer. Come November, the son of a sharecropper will be on the state Supreme Court.”
And New Mexico Business Weekly reports that “Richardson selects Albuquerque attorney for Supreme Court.”
“Court Hands Win to Higazy, Then Balks”: Josh Gerstein of The New York Sun provides a news update that begins, “A federal appeals court today revived a lawsuit brought by an Egyptian student detained as a material witness after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, but the court withdrew its opinion within hours after releasing it. A three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Abdullah Higazy could proceed with his lawsuit against an FBI agent who allegedly coerced Mr. Higazy into admitting that he had an aviation radio in his room at the Millennium Hotel at the World Trade Center on the morning of the attacks.”
My earlier coverage appears here and here.
“Ambassador testifies agent could have gotten OK for photos in terror trial; Evidence is at heart of federal case against ex-officials”: The Detroit News provides an update that begins, “Taking photos of a military hospital in Amman, Jordan, would have been difficult but not impossible, a former U.S. ambassador to Jordan testified Thursday in the continuing prosecutorial misconduct trial involving a former State Department aide and an ex-federal prosecutor who participated in a 2003 terror trial in Detroit.”
“Coerced confession decision will return on Friday “: The blog “Wait A Second!” provides this post.
And the blog “Library Stuff” has a post titled “Bloggers Rule.”
“Reluctant juror is sent to jail; Unemployed carpet installer protests jury duty; judge finds him in contempt of court”: This article appears today in The Detroit News.
“Ga. Supreme Court stays Alderman execution”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides a news update that begins, “The Georgia Supreme Court on Thursday temporarily blocked the scheduled execution of murderer Jack Alderman, sending a signal that the state’s justices will not allow any executions here until there is a resolution to national concerns about lethal injection.”
And The Detroit News today contains an article headlined “Feds push for capital punishment in Michigan cases.”
“Jury reaches verdict in Holy Land trial”: The Dallas Morning News provides an update that begins, “After 19 days of deliberations, the jury in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial returned a verdict Thursday afternoon. But it will be three days before the verdict is made public.”
And in other news from The Associated Press: Now available online are articles headlined “Mukasey Mum on Torture Techniques“; “Ex-Kansas AG Still Anti-Abortion Leader“; “‘Lingerer’ Asks NYC Court to Drop Case“; and “Man Pleads Guilty in Kickback Case.”
“Thomas Rejects Notion He Follows Scalia”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas condemned suggestions that he follows the lead of fellow conservative Antonin Scalia, telling an audience Thursday the notion is based on a racial stereotype.”
Justice Thomas was speaking today in Atlanta, Georgia, which is the second stop on his current book tour. At 7 p.m. eastern time this evening, The Heritage Foundation will broadcast online at this link from Atlanta a “Reception with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.”
This is not the Second Circuit’s opinion issued today in Higazy v. Templeton: I have posted online at this link the opinion that the Second Circuit posted to its web site earlier today. Shortly thereafter, however, the opinion was withdrawn from the web site and in its place was posted an announcement that “The opinion has been withdrawn.”
Additional coverage of today’s non-decision appears here and here.
In earlier press coverage, CNN.com reported in December 2002 that “Former 9/11 detainee files $20 million civil rights suit; ‘Put in solitary, confinement, shackled, strip searched.'” The Associated Press reported in September 2006 that “False 9/11 accusation landed student in jail; Ex-cop, Egyptian, and an aviation radio make an unfortunate 9/11 footnote.” And The New York Times reported in November 2002 that “F.B.I. Report On Student In 9/11 Case To Be Public.”
Update: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, the Clerk of Court of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, has telephoned to advise that the opinion was withdrawn out of a concern that it might disclose information contained in a portion of the appendix on appeal that was submitted under seal. The Second Circuit plans to reissue the decision, as revised to omit any disclosure of information filed under seal, tomorrow morning. The purpose of Ms. Wolfe’s telephone call was to ask me to take down this blog’s posting of the decision to the internet.
Mukasey hearing, day two: In case you didn’t even realize that the Senate Judiciary Committee‘s confirmation hearing for Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey is now in its second and apparently final day, C-SPAN has kindly posted the video of this morning’s session at this link (RealPlayer required) for viewing online, on-demand.
Marty Lederman was watching, and he has a post at “Balkinization” titled “Judge Mukasey is Agnostic on Whether Waterboarding is Lawful.”
Update: You can view the afternoon session of today’s confirmation hearing by clicking here (RealPlayer required).
“Hamdan trial to go forward”: Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”
Asylum petitioner’s voluntary withdrawal of petition for review following en banc reargument in the Ninth Circuit “threatens the integrity of our processes by inviting manipulation by parties unhappy with the questions at oral argument and fearful of the result they believe the court is going to reach”: So asserts Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski in an interesting dissent joined by three other judges on the fifteen-judge en banc panel. Apparently the other eleven judges on the en banc panel were happy to have one fewer en banc decision to worry about getting out the door.
You can access by clicking here the parties’ earlier filings addressing whether en banc review should be granted.
Patents relating to to drive trains for hybrid electric vehicles, on appeal: The invention in question may be environmentally friendly, but was the litigation that the ensued? In any event, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued this ruling today in a lawsuit against Toyota Motor Corp. Don’t print out the ruling if you care about the environment.
“Sept. 11 coerced confession violates the Constitution”: Now you see it; now you don’t. Apparently this morning was not the best time to be away from the computer, because as reported here at the blog “Wait A Second!” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit this morning issued a decision in Higazy v. Millenium Hotel and Resorts holding that a man could sue a Federal agent for coercing a confession about the man’s involvement in the September 11 attacks.
A short time later today, as noted at this link on the Second Circuit’s web site, the Second Circuit withdrew its opinion. If anyone still has a copy floating around that they’d like me to post here, feel free to send it along.
Steve Wermiel and Seth Stern’s biography of U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. sold to publisher Houghton Mifflin for publication in 2010: So reports Publishers Marketplace. Some additional background from earlier this year can be found here and here.
Programming note: I will be participating in an appellate mediation this morning. Additional posts will appear here this afternoon.
“Court to reconsider sacred mountain row”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “A U.S. appeals court said on Wednesday that it would reconsider its decision that barred an Arizona ski resort from using treated sewage to make snow on a mountain sacred to several Native American tribes.”
My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Ninth Circuit order granting rehearing en banc can be accessed here.
“George Bush’s role reversal: The pro-death-penalty president wants Texas to give a death row inmate from Mexico a new hearing.” This editorial appears today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Evidence in 9/11 Damages Cases Is Restricted”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “The federal judge hearing damages cases filed by families of Sept. 11 victims has tightly restricted evidence that one family may present at the first trial.”
“Attorney General Pick Treads Careful Line at Hearing”: The New York Times contains this article today, along with an article headlined “Warmth for a Nominee Viewed as Unlike His Predecessor.” And an editorial is entitled “The Attorney General Nominee.”
The Washington Post today contains a front page article headlined “Mukasey Vows Not to Bow to Political Power.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Mr. Mukasey’s Answers: The attorney general nominee speaks clearly — and senators swoon.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that “Mukasey pledges Justice Dept. reform; In Senate testimony, the attorney general-designate pledges to rid partisan influence and appears to keep at arm’s length from Bush.”
In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “Mukasey asserts his independence; AG nominee vows to resist political push.”
The Wall Street Journal contains an article headlined “Mukasey’s First Dilemma? Backing Off From Acting Deputy May Anger Justice Ranks.”
In The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein reports that “Mukasey Breezing Through; But Terror War Could Take a Hit.”
The Washington Times reports that “Mukasey hits ‘partisan politics.’”
And USA Today reports that “Mukasey vows to distance Justice Dept. from politics; Key senators say he’s likely to be confirmed quickly.”
“Senate and Bush Agree On Terms of Spying Bill; Some Telecom Companies Would Receive Immunity”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.
“In Test of Religious Protections, Court Sides With Jewish School in New York”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “In a decision watched closely by religious rights groups and municipal officials, a federal court has ruled in favor of an Orthodox Jewish religious school that fought for five years with the village of Mamaroneck, N.Y., over its right to construct a new school building.”
You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
“Killer’s life is spared again; U.S. Supreme Court gives stay of execution to Virginia inmate”: The Richmond Times-Dispatch contains this article today.
And Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Court Review Slows Number of Executions.”
