Examining the limits on First Amendment protection of public challenge to police conduct: A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued this interesting decision today.

Eleventh Circuit rejects Tampa political consultant’s contention that his constitutional rights were violated when the Democratic National Committee stripped Florida of its delegates: You can access today’s ruling in DiMaio v. Democratic National Committee at this link.

The appeal was argued on Monday, and The Atlanta Journal Constitution reported on the oral argument in its Tuesday edition in an article headlined “Florida voter lawsuit gets hearing in Atlanta; State leaders abandon plans to redo primary.”

Today’s decision affirms a federal district court’s ruling that this lawsuit is nonjusticiable because the plaintiff lacks standing.

“FBI posts fake hyperlinks to snare child porn suspects”: Declan McCullagh has this post today at his blog “The Iconoclast” at c|net News.com.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr offers these thoughts.

“Justice plans hearing on Massey appeal”: The Associated Press provides a report from West Virginia that begins, “State Supreme Court Justice Larry Starcher plans to hold an unprecedented open hearing on a request that he remove himself from another Massey Energy Co. case.”

“The Second Amendment and Personal Preference”: This week’s installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com begins, “What role, if any, should a judge’s personal preference concerning the outcome of a case play in deciding a dispute? That controversial question resurfaced this week as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a closely watched case that presents the question of whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers an individual right to own guns.”

“Blunt weighs in on case that could impact ‘Devlin’s Law'”: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch provides a news update that begins, “Gov. Matt Blunt has entered the debate in a U.S. Supreme Court case that could decide whether the next Michael Devlin gets the death penalty. Blunt’s office announced today it has filed an amicus brief in Kennedy v. Louisiana, the case of a man sentenced to death for raping his eight-year-old stepdaughter at their home near New Orleans. The case would have broad implications around the U.S., and particularly in Missouri.”

“Dozens of children in U.S. face life in prison”: Reuters provides this report.

“Marijuana possession argued before Alaska’s high court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The latest effort to recriminalize marijuana is now in the hands of the Alaska Supreme Court. The high court heard oral arguments Thursday on a legal challenge to a two-year-old state law that would make personal at-home use of small amounts of marijuana illegal.”

“Sandra Day O’Connor Hears Fredericksburg Prayer Case”: The Washington Post provides a news update that begins, “Retired Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor joined a federal appeals court panel that heard the case of a Fredericksburg City Council member who sued the city after he was barred from invoking the name of Jesus in a council prayer.”

The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports today that “Prayer led by Fredericksburg council reviewed; Appeals court debates dispute over member’s pre-meeting invocation.”

And The Free Lance-Star of Fredericksburg, Virginia reports today that “Justice O’Connor hears appeal; O’Connor sits on three-judge panel hearing prayer case.”

“Judging Guns: The Supreme Court should not deprive governments of their ability to protect public safety.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.

“High court agrees to consider Khadr’s unfair treatment claim”: The Canadian Press provides a report that begins, “The federal government has failed to block the country’s top court from considering whether U.S. authorities are violating international law in their treatment of accused Canadian terrorist Omar Khadr. In a ruling released Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada gave the go-ahead for Khadr’s lawyers to raise the legality of his detention and forthcoming trial at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo, Cuba.”

CBC News reports that “Canada’s top court agrees to hear Khadr’s unfair treatment claim; Ottawa tried to block defence from presenting fresh evidence.”

The Toronto Globe and Mail reports today that “Khadr came within seconds of death in firefight; ‘Someone had a conscience,’ lawyer remarks after U.S. soldier’s diary describes having Canadian teen in the crosshairs.”

The Toronto Star reports today that “Officer’s diary says Khadr not only survivor; Guantanamo court documents state second fighter was alive when U.S. forces arrested Toronto teen.”

The Canadian Press reports that “U.S. officer says he nearly ordered execution of Khadr in Afghanistan.”

Canwest News Service reports that “Court documents show Khadr faced execution on Afghan battlefield.”

Earlier this week, Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald had an article headlined “Gitmo captive: I was threatened with rape.”

And Reuters reports that “Canadian says U.S. interrogators threatened rape.”

Double jeopardy prevents a criminal defendant from being convicted for the federal offenses of receipt of child pornography and possession of child pornography when the conduct underlying both offenses is the same, divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel holds: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

“Scooter Libby Loses Law License”: The Associated Press provides this report.

You can access today’s order of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (and not the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, as The AP’s report initially and erroneously stated) at this link.

“Lawyers for the National Education Association are urging a federal appeals court not to reconsider a ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that revived the union’s legal challenge to the No Child Left Behind Act.” So begins a post today by Mark Walsh at “The School Law Blog” of Education Week.

The federal government’s petition for rehearing en banc, filed in February, can be accessed here. And the NEA’s response, filed yesterday, can be accessed here.

My earlier coverage of the Sixth Circuit’s ruling from January can be accessed here.

Embattled former principal of Arabic-themed NYC public school loses Second Circuit appeal seeking a preliminary injunction: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

In earlier coverage, The Associated Press reported in December 2007 that “In First Round, Judge Rules Against Arabic School’s Ex-Principal.”

The New York Times reported in October 2007 that “Arabic School Ex-Principal Fights to Get Job Back.” According to that article, “In her first detailed public account of what led her to step down after defending the word ‘intifada’ on a T-shirt, the principal, Debbie Almontaser, presented herself as the victim of an anti-Arab ‘smear campaign’ from conservative newspapers and blogs and of pressure from city officials.”

And in August 2007, The New York Times published an “On Education” essay by Samuel G. Freedman entitled “Critics Ignored Record of a Muslim Principal.”

Ninth Circuit overturns criminal convictions for securities fraud, wire fraud, money laundering conspiracy, and failure to file an income tax return due to U.S. District Judge Manuel L. Real‘s “excessive and biased interventions” at trial: According to yesterday’s non-precedential ruling, “The catalog of inappropriate behavior by the trial court is long, so we merely summarize it here.” The decision remands the case for a new trial before a different federal district judge.

“Grisham’s Judicial Appeal: Why the novelist is the ambulance chaser’s best friend.” Collin Levy has this op-ed today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Supreme Court overturns death sentence; The justices rule that racial bias played an improper role in the 1996 Louisiana murder case; Prosecutors may retry the case”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Court tosses verdict, death sentence in race-tinged case; Blacks were cut from jury in La. murder trial.”

In The Christian Science Monitor, Warren Richey reports that “Supreme Court bars use of race in picking juries; Its 7-to-2 ruling Wednesday reverses a Louisiana death-penalty conviction.”

In The Chicago Tribune, James Oliphant reports that “Supreme Court overturns death penalty in Louisiana case.”

And The Times-Picayune of New Orleans reports that “Supreme Court casts out murder conviction; Race used in picking jury in St. Rose man’s death.”

“Court Details Opposition to Bias in Jury Selection”: Linda Greenhouse will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

Thursday in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Blacks Were Improperly Kept Off La. Jury, High Court Rules.”

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court overturns death-row inmate’s conviction; The high court says racial bias played an improper role in the 1996 Louisiana murder case; Prosecutors have the option to retry the case.”

“Plan B rule threatens religious freedom, pharmacists say”: Today’s edition of The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois contains an article that begins, “Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s rule requiring pharmacies to fill prescriptions for the ‘morning-after’ pill poses a direct threat to the religious freedom of business owners and pharmacists, and should be overturned, Illinois Supreme Court justices were told Tuesday.”

And The Belleville News-Democrat reports today that “‘Morning-after’ pill focus of court case; Pharmacists test Blagojevich rule.”

Via the web site of the Supreme Court of Illinois, you can access both the video (Windows Media Player required) and the audio (mp3 format) of yesterday’s oral argument.

“Judge: State’s anti-abortion suit premature.” Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “A federal judge dismissed on Tuesday California’s challenge to a federal anti-abortion law that threatens the state with huge financial penalties, saying the lawsuit – filed in January 2005 – was premature because the alleged state-federal conflict might never arise.”

You can access Tuesday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California at this link.

“Military judge rules for driver’s defense”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald provides a news update that begins, “For a third time, a military judge has authorized lawyers for Osama bin Laden’s driver to send questions to alleged al Qaeda kingpins in segregation at Guantanamo. The ruling by Navy Capt. Keith Allred rejected national security arguments raised by Pentagon prosecutors. The military judge also sounded dismissive of a government argument that the driver could have conspired in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks without knowing about the suicide plot.”

The newspaper has posted the ruling online at this link.

“High Court Says Blacks Kept off Jury in Murder Case”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

Access the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Brown, No. 06-939: The Court has posted it at this link.

“Right to Bear Arms”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Lyle Denniston and Jonathan Turley appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of the public radio program “Here and Now.”

“Justice Scalia and Oscar the Grouch”: Tony Mauro has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Majority: Give Wash. ‘top 2’ primaries a chance to work.” Tony Mauro has this news analysis at the First Amendment Center.

“Court overturns death row inmate’s conviction”: James Vicini of Reuters provides this report.

“Court Questions California on Unions”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Supreme Court justices questioned Wednesday whether a state should be able to prohibit employers from using state money to influence employees’ views on unions in their workplace.”

Access the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, No. 06-1717: The Court has posted it at this link.

“Individuals’ Rights Key in Landmark D.C. Gun Case”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Court Rejects La. Murder Conviction”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court threw out the death sentence and conviction in a Louisiana murder case Wednesday, citing racial prejudice in the actions of a prosecutor who called the murder trial his ‘O.J. Simpson case’ and kept blacks off the jury.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court finds flaws in La. jury choice.”

The U.S. Supreme Court‘s lone opinion in an argued case issued today in Snyder v. Louisiana, No. 06-10119. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued the majority opinion, in which the Chief Justice and Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer joined. Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Antonin Scalia joined. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

“Court Weighs Right to Guns, and Its Limits”: Linda Greenhouse has this front page article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court appears to favor individual gun rights; A majority signals that it thinks the 2nd Amendment is not limited to arms for ‘a well-regulated militia.’”

Charlie Savage of The Boston Globe reports that “High Court hears 2d Amendment case; Justices asked to reverse D.C. handgun ban.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “U.S. Supreme Court judges question DC gun ban; At a court session Tuesday, majority judges seemed to support an individual’s right to bear arms.”

In The Chicago Tribune, James Oliphant reports that “High court signals gun sentiments; Some weigh in on 2nd Amendment.”

law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “Supreme Court Hears Arguments in D.C. Gun Ban Case; Afterwards, gun-control advocates seemed less pessimistic than before the arguments, though they did not predict victory.”

Emma Schwartz of U.S. News & World Reports has an article headlined “Justices Lean Toward Individual Right to Bear Arms; Supreme Court hears arguments in the landmark case on the District of Columbia’s gun ban.”

The Washington Times contains articles headlined “Court weighs right to own guns” and “Gun fanciers, foes get day in court.”

Joseph Goldstein of The New York Sun reports that “9 Seem Set To Rule for Gun Rights; Case Could Make Legal History.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Heller at the High Bench.”

The New York Daily News reports that “Supreme Court could lift 32-year handgun ban in the nation’s capital.”

The Albany (N.Y.) Times Union reports that “D.C. gun rights case is of supreme interest.”

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that “Utahns watching Supreme Court gun case, but doubt it will affect them.”

The Lancaster (Pa.) Intelligencer Journal has an article headlined “MU grad witnesses high court gun talk” reporting on the first two members of the general public in line to gain admission to the oral argument.

The Harrisburg Patriot-News contains an article headlined “Would gun ban work in city?”

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette reports that “Leading gun-control activist, ex-mayor ‘amazed’ by debate.”

The Statesville (N.C.) Record & Landmark reports that “Residents discuss right to bear arms as case heads to Supreme Court.”

The Toronto Globe and Mail reports that “Gun-control case starts to split U.S. court.”

The Telegraph (UK) reports that “US gun law in Supreme Court’s sights.”

USA Today contains an editorial entitled “Preserve limits on guns: Case gives court chance to balance individual rights, public safety” along with an op-ed by Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson entitled “An unambiguous right: 2nd Amendment bars regulation of people’s ability to bear arms.”

And The Baltimore Sun contains an editorial entitled “The D.C. handgun ban.”

“Former FBI Agent Investigates ‘Naughty’ Judge; Randy Judge Is Under Investigation for Alleged Judicial Misconduct”: ABCNews.com provides a report that begins, “A former FBI agent has been hired to investigate Colorado’s top federal judge who was recently linked to an investigation into a Denver-based prostitution ring. Former FBI agent David Brundage is working for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in its investigation of Judge Edward Nottingham for alleged judicial misconduct in two cases, ABC News has learned.”

“Retrial: No sure way to tell who has edge.” Today’s edition of The Rocky Mountain News contains an article that begins, “Who has the upper hand if the government retries former Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio? It depends on whom you ask.”

And The Denver Post today contains an editorial entitled “For judge, a vote of no confidence.”