“States Seek Delay in California Marriage Ruling”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Concerned about the national ramifications of same-sex marriages in California, attorneys general from 10 states have asked the California Supreme Court to stay its decision legalizing the marriages, which are set to begin on June 17.”

And Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle reports today that “10 state ask delay in same-sex ruling.”

“Judge critical of Guantanamo war crimes case is dismissed; Army Col. Peter Brownback III had threatened to suspend proceedings unless prosecutors handed over key records to the defense”: Carol J. Williams has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And The New York Times reports today that “Army Judge Is Replaced for Trial of Detainee.”

“Court Upholds Key Provision of the Voting Rights Act”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.

The Washington Post reports today that “Judges Uphold Voting Rights Act; Challenge to Law Called Key Test Case.”

The Austin American-Statesman reports that “Austin MUD loses Voting Rights Act challenge; Group did not want pre-clearance to move a voting location out of a garage.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Federal court upholds voting rights extension.”

And at his “Election Law” blog, Rick Hasen offers these thoughts on yesterday’s ruling of a three-judge U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“Strong Backing for Ex-Governor’s Appeal”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Fifty-four former state attorneys general filed a brief Friday supporting the appeal of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, convicted two years ago on bribery and corruption charges in a prosecution depicted by his supporters as politically motivated.”

“Vindicating Vioxx”: Today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial that begins, “Texas and New Jersey may have different political cultures, but appeals courts in both states this week delivered a one-two punch to the liability suits against Merck for its Vioxx painkiller.”

“US judge in DUI case won’t return to bench; Resignation delayed by his second thoughts”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “US Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert Somma, who resigned after his arrest on a drunken driving charge in February and then tried to rescind it, will not be coming back to work, federal court officials said yesterday.”

The Boston Herald reports today that “Judge nabbed in sexy dress is off bench.”

And The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader reports that “Drunk driving judge will stay resigned.”

You can access at this link yesterday’s statement from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

“How Appealing” has completed its move to new web servers: If you attempted to access this blog late last night or this morning, you may instead have found yourselves at the law.com home page. As I recently mentioned, “How Appealing” was moving from one company’s web servers to another company’s web servers.

The switch-over is now complete. Thanks again to rubystudio, which served as this blog’s online host since the now-defunct “Legal Affairs” magazine began hosting this blog. This blog’s new online host is pair Networks.

If any aspect of this blog is not functioning normally for you as a result of the switch to new web servers, please let me know via email so that I can (if possible) get the issue resolved.

Available online from law.com: Pamela A. MacLean of The National Law Journal has an article headlined “Bid to Sue 4th Circuit’s Former Chief Judge Over Fees Falters” reporting on a non-precedential decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued on Wednesday. It is interesting to note that Eighth Circuit Chief Judge James B. Loken sat by designation as the trial judge in the case.

An article headlined “2nd Circuit Holds Magistrates Lack Power to Remand” reports on this ruling issued Wednesday.

And in other news, “Miami Law Firms in Talks With State Supreme Court Justice.”

“Did Affirmative Action Really Hinder Clarence Thomas? The Supreme Court Justice says racial preference made it impossible for him to find a law firm job; His black classmates tell a different story.” Tamara Loomis will have this article in the June 2008 issue of The American Lawyer.

Welcome to “How Appealing” located at its new web host: If this page looks somewhat different than normal, the reason is that some of the images normally present on this page are not yet loading normally, and the font in which the posts on this page appear is not the same as before.

Once the internet’s Domain Name Service begins to recognize howappealing.law.com as the IP address of 65.181.161.172/blog/, then this page will appear the same as at its former web host.

Update: The issues noted in this post appear to have all been resolved.

WSJ.com’s “Law Blog” interviews Justice Antonin Scalia about his new book: The interview appears in three parts: here, here, and here.

For the record, the author of “How Appealing” has taken no steps to arrange an interview with Justice Scalia, although I will be in the same room as him one week from today in Farmington, Pennsylvania (of all places).

“Logjam: Politicians can’t agree who should fill vacancies on the nation’s most reliably conservative appellate court’ If the logjam lasts past November, the court may take a turn to the left.” This article will appear in the June 2008 issue of ABA Journal magazine.

Three-judge federal district court rejects argument that the U.S. Congress in 2006 lacked sufficient evidence of racial discrimination to extend Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for another twenty-five years: Circuit Judge David S. Tatel issued today’s lengthy decision on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Court: Voting Rights Act provision deemed constitutional.”

Divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel grants a new trial to man convicted of soliciting the murders of an Assistant U.S. Attorney, an IRS Special Agent, and a U.S. District Judge: You can access today’s ruling at this link. Interestingly, another Ninth Circuit judge served by designation as the trial court judge in the case, making the score 2-2 among Ninth Circuit judges over whether the defendant’s new trial motion should have been granted.

“Will the Supreme Court Play Ball With Fantasy Baseball Leagues?” FOXNews.com provides this report.

“Fieger jury signals verdict could take a while”: David Ashenfelter has this article today in The Detroit Free Press.

“Court finds Texas A&M administrators can be held liable in bonfire collapse lawsuit”: The Waco Tribune-Herald today contains an article that begins, “Twelve former Texas A&M University administrators are not immune from lawsuit claims filed by the families of three students killed and two injured in the November 1999 collapse of the Aggie bonfire, a divided Waco appeals court has ruled.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram today reports that “Texas A&M officials can’t claim immunity in bonfire case, court rules.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court says A&M officials not immune in bonfire suits.”

Wednesday’s ruling of the Tenth Court of Appeals of Texas consisted of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

In news from the Canadian province of Saskatchewan: The Regina Leader-Post reports that “Supreme Court sides with Sask. anti-abortion protester.”

And Reuters reports that “Top court won’t hear abortion picketer case.”

“Foes, in court, seek to delay gay marriages”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

Today in The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan reports that “State urges California Supreme Court not to delay same-sex marriages; Delaying enactment of the ruling would improperly mix judicial and political affairs, attorney general argues; Opponents had requested a stay until November, when a measure will appear on state ballot.”

And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Supreme Court urged to finalize gay-marriage ruling; Opponents seek delay until Nov.”

“Courts Reject Two Major Vioxx Verdicts”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

Today in The Houston Chronicle, Mary Flood reports that “Court tosses Vioxx award; Houston panel rules plaintiff will get none of the $26 million.”

The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reports that “Vioxx awards overturned; Drugmaker wins appeals in Texas and New Jersey.”

And Texas Lawyer reports that “Plaintiffs Lawyer Lanier to Appeal Vioxx Reversal.”

Yesterday morning, I had this post linking to both rulings.

“Verdict mixed in S.F. steroid trial of coach”: Lance Williams and Bob Egelko have this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Texas Loses Court Ruling Over Taking of Children”: The New York Times contains this article today.

The Washington Post reports today that “High Court in Texas Backs Sect’s Parents.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “FLDS ruling upheld by Texas Supreme Court; The state failed to show that the polygamist sect’s children were in imminent danger when they were seized, justices agree; Experts say each case will have to be handled individually.”

USA Today reports that “Ruling upheld in polygamist case; 126 kids may soon return to sect ranch.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “State officials prepare to reunite sect children with parents.”

The Dallas Morning News reports that “Children removed from polygamist ranch could be going home.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram contains an article headlined “Texas Supreme Court: CPS overstepped its bounds in polygamy sect case.”

The San Antonio Express-News reports that “State is set to return children to sect parents.”

Texas Lawyer reports that “Texas Supreme Court Nixes Removal of Children From Polygamists’ Ranch.”

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that “Texas Supreme Court says the state crossed the line by keeping FLDS kids in custody.”

And from National Public Radio, yesterday evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Texas Court Agrees Children Must Be Returned,” while today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “Court Deems Polygamist Kids’ Removal Unlawful.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“34 Convicted in Display At U.S. Supreme Court; Protesters Had Decried Guantanamo”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Court To Decide If Spitzer Overreached on Grasso”: Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article that begins, “The state’s highest court is gearing up to decide whether Eliot Spitzer overreached four years ago when, as attorney general, he sought to force a former New York Stock Exchange chief, Richard Grasso, to relinquish his $187.5 million pay package.”

“Future Gay Unions Face Legal Hurdles in California”: law.com provides a report that begins, “Same-sex couples excited by the California Supreme Court’s two-week-old decision declaring their right to wed are already booking dates to get licenses. But what will happen to those marriages if voters approve a proposed constitutional amendment in November that would restrict marriage to the union of a man and a woman? There is no clear answer, but attorneys on both sides of the issue have staked out their positions and are ready for a fight.”

“Appeals Court Rules Against Burlington Student”: The Hartford Courant today contains an article that begins, “Ruling in a case that addresses broad questions of the boundaries of free speech in the Internet age, a federal appeals court on Thursday effectively ended a Burlington student’s effort to serve as a class officer and speak at graduation.”

And The Associated Press reports that “NY court finds speech made outside of school can be punished.”

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

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Gitmo judge removed from Canadian’s case” and “Lawyers want 9/11 trial dismissed.”

“The state illegally removed more than 400 children from their parents last month after raiding a polygamist sect’s West Texas ranch, the Texas Supreme Court said today.” So begins this news update from The Houston Chronicle.

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Court: Sect children should be returned to parents.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Texas consists of a majority opinion and an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. The majority opinion in a second, related case can be accessed here.

Second Circuit rules against high school student who claims her First Amendment rights were violated when she was disciplined by the school for posting a vulgar and misleading message about an upcoming school event on an publicly-accessible web log: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit today issued its ruling in the much-anticipated case of Doninger v. Niehoff.

Today’s opinion begins, “Plaintiff-Appellant Lauren Doninger appeals from the August 31, 2007 order of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Kravitz, J.) denying her motion for a preliminary injunction. Doninger v. Niehoff, 514 F. Supp. 2d 199 (D. Conn. 2007). Doninger sued Defendants-Appellees Karissa Niehoff and Paula Schwartz, respectively the principal of Lewis Mills High School and the superintendent of the district in which LMHS is located, when her daughter, Avery Doninger, was disqualified from running for Senior Class Secretary after she posted a vulgar and misleading message about the supposed cancellation of an upcoming school event on an independently operated, publicly accessible web log (or ‘blog’).”

The introductory paragraph continues, “Doninger, alleging principally a violation of her daughter’s First Amendment rights, moved for a preliminary injunction voiding the election for Senior Class Secretary and ordering the school either to hold a new election in which Avery would be allowed to participate or to grant Avery the same title, honors, and obligations as the student elected to the position, including the privilege of speaking as a class officer at graduation. The district court denied the motion, concluding that Doninger had failed to show a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. Because Avery’s blog post created a foreseeable risk of substantial disruption at LMHS, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. We therefore affirm the denial of Doninger’s preliminary injunction motion.”

The federal district court’s decision, which today’s Second Circuit ruling affirms, can be accessed at this link. My earlier coverage of this case appears here (covering the Second Circuit’s oral argument) and here (covering the trial court’s ruling).

“Personhood amendment on Nov. ballot”: The Denver Post provides a news update that begins, “Colorado voters will be asked to amend the state Constitution this November to define personhood as ‘any human being from the moment of fertilization.’ Colorado for Equal Rights, the grassroots group seeking a measure to extend constitutional protections to the earliest individuals, fertilized eggs, succeeded in submitting more than enough valid voter signatures, the secretary of state said Thursday morning.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Anti-abortion measure OK’d for Colo. ballot.”

“NJ, Texas courts scrap awards from Vioxx cases”: The Associated Press provides this report on state intermediate appellate court rulings that issued today from Texas and New Jersey.

You can access today’s ruling of the Fourteenth Court of Appeals of Texas at this link.

And you can access today’s lengthy ruling of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, at this link.

Does Arkansas law prohibit marriage between a man and his adopted daughter’s adopted daughter? As characterized by the dissenting judge, today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in a case involving convictions for conspiracy to defraud the United States Department of Defense and making material false statements to a federal agent involves a scheme notable for its “ickiness.”

“For Blind High Court Clerk, the Sky’s the Limit”: law.com’s Tony Mauro has this report. According to the article, in July 2008, Isaac Lidsky will become the first blind person to become a law clerk at the U.S. Supreme Court. According to the article, Lidsky previously clerked for Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Thanks to YouTube, you can watch Isaac throw out the first pitch at a Florida Marlins game from last year and speak about his charitable organization, Hope For Vision.

“High court hearing pits religious vs. equal rights; Lesbian sued doctors who denied her fertility procedure”: Greg Moran has this article today in The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Court weighs if doctors can not treat lesbian.”

In The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan reports that “State Supreme Court may give gays a medical victory; Justices appear to be leaning toward forbidding doctors from denying treatment based on their religious views.”

law.com reports that “Calif. Justices Appear to Favor Lesbian in Dispute Over Artificial Insemination; Case with unusually high number of amicus briefs involves doctors who claimed religious beliefs kept them from providing intrauterine insemination.”

And The Bay Area Reporter has an article headlined “Infertility case goes to high court.”

“Phila. fire paramedics win right to receive overtime pay”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an article that begins, “Philadelphia Fire Department paramedics who went to court to get overtime pay won a significant victory yesterday when a federal appeals court ruled they are entitled to overtime pay if they work more than 40 hours a week. The 2-1 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit came in a case involving about 300 fire service paramedics who are assigned to 40 different units at firehouses across the city. The appellate judges sent the case back to federal district court for a determination of damages.”

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