“After Ruling, Groups Spend Heavily to Sway Races”: Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an article that begins, “Spurred by a recent Supreme Court decision, independent political groups are using their financial muscle and organizational clout as never before to influence the presidential race, pumping money and troops into early nominating states on behalf of their favored candidates.”

“Chief justice pushes for higher salaries for federal judges”: The Associated Press provides this early report on Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s year-end report on the federal judiciary.

“Abrahamson talks Supreme Court campaigns, perceptions”: The Associated Press provides this report on its recent interview with Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

“Court Bars Detainee Transfer to Algeria”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court Monday blocked the Bush administration from transferring a detainee at Guantanamo Bay to Algeria, where the prisoner says his life would be in danger from the government and al-Qaida. The appeals court is stopping any transfer while it considers Ahmed Belbacha’s request that he not be returned to his home country.”

In case 2007 wouldn’t feel complete without at least one more precedential U.S. Court of Appeals ruling (or “All About Eve“): The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which issued a precedential ruling on Christmas Eve (my post reporting on that ruling can be accessed here), has now also issued a precedential ruling on New Year’s Eve.

Today’s decision begins, “This appeal raises an issue that we have not previously decided: what standard should be applied when analyzing a claim that a defendant has breached a plea agreement.” Interestingly, the Third Circuit did not issue any precedential rulings after Christmas Eve until today.

“The Chief’s Year-End Report”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post that begins, “Tonight’s the night for champagne, Auld Lang Syne — and the chief justice’s end-of-year report on the state of the federal judiciary.” If earlier years are any indication, press reports on the document will begin to appear online several hours before midnight east coast time, so stay tuned!

You’re not going anywhere: I’m pleased to announce that I have extended my current relationship with ALM’s law.com for another two years. As a result, my weekly “On Appeal” column, which I began two years ago, will continue for another two years. And “How Appealing” will remain a part of the law.com blog network through at least April 20, 2010.

The next installment of my “On Appeal” column will appear next Monday, when I will provide my list of the top ten appellate court rulings of 2007 (excluding U.S. Supreme Court rulings). Readers who would like to offer nominations for that list are invited to contact me via email.

“Race emerges as a death penalty issue”: The Kansas City Star today contains an article that begins, “Across the nation, death chambers sit idle while the U.S. Supreme Court mulls the viability of lethal injection. But it’s another less-publicized death penalty issue that in the long run may prove to have a much larger impact on who dies and who decides if they should. The issue is race.”

“Phila.’s campaign limits are upheld”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an article that begins, “The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has upheld Philadelphia’s campaign-finance limits, a victory for reform-minded Mayor-elect Michael Nutter just days before his inauguration.”

And The Philadelphia Daily News reports today that “Supreme Court upholds city’s law on campaign finances.”

Friday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, which that court posted online yesterday, consists of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

As I wrote in this post from last night reporting on another ruling that Pennsylvania’s highest court issued Friday and posted online yesterday, “In just a matter of days, three of the seven justices currently serving on Pennsylvania’s highest court will be departing from that court. As a result, the court has been issuing an unusually high volume of decisions in argued cases over the past few days and weeks.”

“Narragansetts mull U.S. Supreme Court appeal in smokeshop case”: This article appears online today at Indian Country Today.

“Deep divisions over US gun control; Gun control is expected to become a hot topic for the US presidential election as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on a controversial handgun ban in the nation’s capital”: BBC News provides this report.

“Robert Henry to take top spot on federal court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Robert Henry is getting a promotion. The Shawnee, Oklahoma, native will become chief judge of the Denver-based federal court tomorrow. The cousin of Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry, Robert Henry joined the court 13 years ago.”

Because Circuit Judge Robert H. Henry was placed on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit by President Bill Clinton, his ascension to chief judge of that court will end the Republican appointee stranglehold on all of the Nation’s federal appellate court chief judgeships that began when Alex Kozinski became chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this month.

“Guantanamo Bay detainee dies of cancer; The Afghan native, 68, was accused of being a member of the Taliban; He is the prison’s first inmate to die of natural causes”: Carol J. Williams has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has an article headlined “Pentagon: Cancer killed Guantanamo detainee.”

“The Challenges Alex Kozinski Faces as the New Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit”: Carl Tobias has this essay online today at FindLaw.

“In the Fight Over Piracy, a Rare Stand for Privacy”: Monday’s edition of The New York Times will contain this installment of Adam Liptak’s “Sidebar” column.

“In sum, the number of issues raised in a Rule 1925(b) statement does not, without more, provide a basis upon which to deny appellate review where an appeal otherwise complies with the mandates of appellate practice.” So states the opinion announcing the judgment of the court that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued Friday in Eiser v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

The question presented in the case asked: “Did Appellant waive her right to appellate review by raising a quantity of issues sufficient to impair meaningful appellate review?”

The decision, which the court posted online today, also consists of an opinion concurring in the judgment and two dissenting opinions (here and here). In addition, the court’s Chief Justice concurred in the result without issuing an opinion.

In just a matter of days, three of the seven justices currently serving on Pennsylvania’s highest court will be departing from that court. As a result, the court has been issuing an unusually high volume of decisions in argued cases over the past few days and weeks.

“Chipping at tough crack sentencing; Laws were ineffective and the drug’s ravages overblown, experts say”: Richard B. Schmitt and David G. Savage have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Aussie Taliban Goes Free”: This article appears online at Time magazine’s web site.

“In-state tuition fight may head to high court; Controversial state law allows lower rate for some illegal immigrants”: The Topeka Capital-Journal today contains an article that begins, “The fight over in-state tuition in Kansas for the children of some illegal immigrants may be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Malls: free speech zones; A California Supreme Court decision says malls, like parks, can’t pick who protests inside.” This editorial appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“U.S. Supreme Court expected to make decision on Teck Cominco case soon”: The Canadian Press provides this report.

“Kenneth Starr: Open to the public; These days, the former special prosecutor pursues service and conscience in the law.” Jim Newton has this interview online today at the web site of The Los Angeles Times.

“High court’s ruling to have lasting impact in Ohio; Law limiting money damages in pain-and-suffering lawsuits will make Ohio business-friendly, supporters say”: The Dayton Daily News today contains an article that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a law limiting the money damages that can be awarded in pain-and-suffering lawsuits could discourage people from pursuing those lawsuits and eliminate a deterrent for companies to fix defective products, trial lawyers said.”

“Voter ID Law Heads to Supreme Court”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The dispute over Indiana’s voter identification law that is headed to the Supreme Court next week is as much a partisan political drama as a legal tussle.”

“Ruling Against Muslim Group Is Overturned; Former Charity, Others Not Liable in Teen’s Death”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

The Chicago Tribune today contains an article headlined “Terror suit award tossed out; Judge: No Hamas tie to teen slaying shown.”

And Reuters reports that “U.S. court overturns $156 mln award in terror case.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Seventh Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Court reverses IU teacher assistant’s firing”: The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review today contains an article that begins, “The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Friday ordered a new hearing for a teacher’s assistant fired in 2002 from her job in Westmoreland County for allegedly violating a district morality clause.”

Thursday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of a majority opinion, a concurring opinion, and two dissenting opinions (here and here).

“Drug dealer ordered to finish prison term after nine years free; Smithton man remained out of jail due to bureaucratic mistakes”: This article appears today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

And The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports today that “Rankin man jailed years after arrest must finish time.”

Thursday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of a majority opinion and a concurring opinion.

“High court lifts limit on OHSU liability; The move against the $200,000 cap affects state agencies and all local governments”: The Oregonian today contains an article that begins, “The Oregon Supreme Court ruled Friday that the family of a brain-damaged child can pursue millions of dollars from Oregon Health & Science University, opening the door for people hurt by any public employee to seek full compensation for their injuries. The court ruled that a liability cap of $200,000 designed to protect government agencies from expensive lawsuits violates the constitutional rights of Jordaan Michael Clarke, 9, who suffered permanent brain damage in 1998 while in intensive care at OHSU Hospital.” The newspaper also reports today that “Ruling will force cuts in programs.”

And The Statesman Journal of Salem, Oregon reports today that “Government liability cap is overruled; Public agencies, and taxpayers, may face more expensive lawsuits.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Oregon at this link.

“A Texas tale: Oil, business meet history, sabotage; Historic family, Exxon, small producer wage legal war fueled by old wells.” Chuck Lindell will have this article Sunday in The Austin American-Statesman.

“Pentagon sends 10 Saudis home from Gitmo”: Today in The Miami Herald, Carol Rosenberg has an article that begins, “The Pentagon has downsized the detainee population at Guantanamo again — announcing Friday evening that it had sent 10 presumably long-held captives home to Saudi Arabia.”

“Upcoming Supreme Court Case Could Redefine Patent Exhaustion”: Dow Jones Newswires provide this report.

“After 7-Year Custody Fight, Family to Return to China; Faced With Deportation, Anna Mae He and Her Parents Plan to Return to China”: ABCNews.com provides this report.

The Associated Press reports that “Girl in Custody Fight Headed to China.”

And earlier this month, The Commercial Appeal of Memphis published articles headlined “Faced with deportation, the He family heading back to homeland” and “Anna He absorbing Chinese culture, adjusting to a different world with her family.”

“Supreme Court’s clerks find Indian law unimportant”: Matthew L.M. Fletcher has this essay online at Indian Country Today.

“More Power for Executive: Will It Last?” Adam Liptak will have this article Sunday in The New York Times.

“Tapes by C.I.A. Lived and Died to Save Image”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.