“Workers can sue firms over retaliation, Supreme Court rules; In two rulings Tuesday, the justcies took an expansive view of civil rights law”: Warren Richey will have this article Wednesday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Texas appeal says FLDS families are flight risks”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Families of children seized from their polygamist sect’s ranch could flee Texas if they regain custody, child welfare authorities said Tuesday as they urged the state Supreme Court to block a ruling that found the massive removals to be improper.”

State of California, don’t tax Eugene Volokh’s porn! Law Professor Volokh (the elder) explains why a proposed California tax on “the sale of, or the storage, use, or other consumption of, tangible personal property that is adult material” would be unconstitutional in a post that you can access here.

“Boy Scouts sue Phila. to stay in headquarters”: The Philadelphia Inquirer provides a news update that begins, “The Boy Scouts of America’s Philadelphia chapter has sued the City of Philadelphia in federal court to block the city’s May 31 deadline for the scouts to open membership to gays and atheists, or vacate their historic 1928 headquarters off Logan Square. The civil rights lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court in Center City, contends that the city’s ultimatum violates the scouts’ rights under the U.S. and Pennsylvania Constitutions.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Boy Scouts sue Philadelphia over rent, policy barring gays.”

“Supreme Court bolsters anti-bias protections for workers in 2 rulings; In one case, justices back a fired black man’s bias claim based on the nation’s first civil rights law; In the other, a federal clerk wins an anti-retaliation safeguard enjoyed in the private sector”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Access online today’s decisions in argued cases and Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court today issued three decisions in argued cases but did not grant review in any new cases, although the Court did call for the views of the Solicitor General in one case.

1. In Gomez-Perez v. Potter, No. 06-1321, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer joined. The Chief Justice issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined. Justice Thomas also issued a short separate dissent, in which Justice Scalia joined. Speculation abounds that Justice Alito did not want to squelch the current meme about the Court’s no longer deciding cases by 5-4 margins, and also he never really liked those Harry Potter books very much. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

2. In CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, No. 06-1431, Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Alito joined. Justice Thomas issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Scalia joined. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

3. And in Riley v. Kennedy, No. 07-77, Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, and Alito joined. Justice Stevens issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Souter joined. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court protects against retaliation.”

The Associated Press provides reports headlined “Court OKs suits on retaliation in race, age cases“; “Supreme Court sides with Ala. governor“; “Court turns down former Illinois governor“; and “Justices turn down T-Mobile appeal over contracts.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Worker Retaliation Suits Backed by U.S. Supreme Court.”

And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Court rejects appeal by ex-Illinois Gov. Ryan.”

“Court to hear insemination case; Lesbian’s suit spurred by denial of treatment”: Today in The San Diego Union-Tribune, Greg Moran has an article that begins, “With its historic same-sex marriage ruling still reverberating across the state, the California Supreme Court this week will take up another case – with landmark potential – involving same-sex civil rights and religious freedom. The issue is whether fertility physicians at North Coast Women’s Care in Vista discriminated against a lesbian couple from Oceanside when they cited religious beliefs in refusing to perform artificial insemination.”

And The Associated Press reports that “High court to hear lesbian’s case; Woman claims doctors denied artificial insemination because of sexual orientation.”

“Are FLDS sect’s beliefs sufficient grounds for taking the kids? Texas Supreme Court is set to weigh in on state’s actions toward a polygamous sect.” The Christian Science Monitor contains this article today.

“Judge’s old notes shed light on last execution in R.I.” This article appeared Sunday in The Providence Journal.

“Three Gavels for Tennessee”: Today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial that begins, “It was sunny in Tennessee last week, when the state’s controversial method of picking judges was allowed to expire amid high-stakes legislative wrangling. The change marks the first time a merit selection plan has been ousted in any state that has adopted it.”

“Off the bench, judge blogs her mind; Gertner’s observations an anomaly in Mass.” The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “For those who think the typical blogger is a twenty-something tapping on a laptop while wearing pajamas and listening to Death Cab for Cutie through earbuds, a Brookline woman who blogs on legal affairs for Slate magazine is an anomaly. At 62, she finds listening to music with lyrics too distracting when she writes, although she sometimes likes Chopin in the background. She typically composes her blogs in her work attire – a business suit or a dress. And she’s a federal judge.”

U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner is among the many contributors to Slate’s “Convictions” blog. You can access only her posts (totaling four, thus far) by clicking here.

“The California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Marriage for Same-Sex Couples: Why Domestic Partnerships Are Not Enough.” Joanna Grossman and Linda McClain have this essay online today at FindLaw.

“California gay marriage ruling isn’t seen as trend; The state Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a ban on such unions is not likely to have a national ripple effect, experts on both sides of the issue say”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times, along with an article headlined “Bans on gay marriages are expected to face legal challenges; Conservative activists say the California ruling exposes a vulnerability in the laws against same-sex unions.”

And The San Francisco Chronicle reports today that “Battle looms for plan to ban same-sex nuptials.”

“With Other Nations Refusing Detainees’ Return, ‘We Are Stuck’ With Guantanamo, Gates Says”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“11th Circuit to Consider Whether Right to Counsel Is Lost When Assets Are Frozen”: law.com provides this report.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “YouTube suit called threat to online communication” and “Lethal injections raise defense attorneys’ fears.”

“The California Supreme Court’s Decision Equalizing Marriage for Gay and Straight Couples: Did the Court Overstep?” Edward Lazarus has this essay online at FindLaw.

“Lawsuit against Cappy strikes a political nerve”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Pennsylvania League of Women Voters has clearly struck a nerve with its lawsuit against former state Chief Justice Ralph Cappy. Time will tell if it’s more serious than that.”

The Citizens’ Voice of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania reported yesterday that “League of Women Voters challenges Pa. chief justice’s sanctions threat.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an editorial entitled “Slots Lawsuit: The plot sickens.”

Today in The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania, columnist Paul Carpenter has an op-ed entitled “Idea of Cappy being right about lawsuit is gloomy.”

And Friday’s edition of The Times-Tribune of Scranton, Pennsylvania contained an editorial entitled “Lawsuit sources should go public.”

“W.Va. court won’t hear appeal in Massey case”: Yesterday’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contained an article that begins, “The parent of Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel won an important victory yesterday when the West Virginia Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the $220 million judgment the struggling steel company won last summer from Massey Energy.”

And The Associated Press reports that “W.Va. top court rejects Massey appeal in coal case.”

“Defending KSM, ‘the most hated man in the world’; Navy lawyer Prescott Prince’s client is self-described 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed”: This front page article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

Washington Nationals 7, Milwaukee Brewers 6: My son and I took Amtrak from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C. today to see our first game at the Washington Nationals’ new stadium, Nationals Park. It was quite easy and very quick to reach the stadium from Union Station via the Metro.

Nationals Park is a lovely facility in which to view a baseball game. The stadium is located just half a block from the Navy Yard Metro stop. Our seats were in the lower level, so we did not venture up to the higher levels of seating. But the lower level is chock-full of food choices. I had a pulled pork sandwich from Red Hot & Blue, and I agree with The Washington Post that it was delicious. The Gifford’s Ice Cream was also quite tasty. And, perhaps in honor of the opposing team, there was plenty of Leinie’s on tap.

As for the baseball game, it was quite a battle. First, the Nationals jumped out to a 6-0 lead. Then the Brewers rallied to tie the game in the top of the 6th inning by batting around. Finally, the Nationals won the game in the bottom of the 9th inning on a wild pitch. You can access the box score at this link, while wraps from MLB.com are here and here. Corey Hart‘s home run landed just three rows away from where we were sitting, and we are even briefly visible (at least to ourselves) in this replay of the homer.

We will get to visit the upper levels of Nationals Park on August 31, 2008, when we will return to watch the Nationals host the Atlanta Braves. Our seats that day are in the infield gallery in the 300 level.

“High court in Crist’s hands; Gov. Charlie Crist will get a remarkable chance to overhaul the state Supreme Court, which in recent years has ruled on ballot recounts, private school vouchers and the fate of Terri Schiavo”: The Miami Herald today contains an article that begins, “Gov. Charlie Crist, who has been in office for little more than a year, will get a rare opportunity in the next few months to completely reshape the Florida Supreme Court. Four sitting Supreme Court justices will step down between now and March, including two appointed by then-Gov. Jeb Bush. The latest to announce his departure, Justice Kenneth Bell, said Friday he wants to return to Pensacola to spend more time with his family.”

“Texas appeals polygamist ruling; State Supreme Court to decide whether families will be reunited”: Chuck Lindell has this article today in The Austin American-Statesman.

The New York Times reports today that “Texas Tries to Reverse Court Ruling in Sect Case.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Texas asks state justices to overturn polygamy sect ruling; Authorities acknowledge that if the appellate court decision is not thrown out, the state may have to return more than 400 children; A judge allows 12 children to reunite with their parents.”

The Dallas Morning News reports that “Texas asks state Supreme Court to keep polygamist sect’s kids in state custody.”

And The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that “Texas CPS appeals to keep custody of children taken from ranch.”

“Rendering Justice, With One Eye on Re-Election”: As part if his “American Exception” series, Sunday in The New York Times reporter Adam Liptak will have this article about judges as politicians. You can access earlier articles in the series via this link.

In today’s mail: Today I received a copy of Steve Martini‘s forthcoming book, “Shadow of Power.” The book is scheduled to go on sale next Tuesday.

The publisher’s summary of the book’s plot is somewhat amusing:

The Supreme Court is one of our most sacred–and secretive–public institutions. But sometimes secrets can lead to cover-ups with very deadly consequences.

Terry Scarborough is a legal scholar and provocateur who craves headline-making celebrity, but with his latest book he may have gone too far. In it he resurrects forgotten language in the U.S. Constitution–and hints at a missing letter of Thomas Jefferson’s–that threatens to divide the nation.

Then, during a publicity tour, Scarborough is brutally murdered in a San Diego hotel room, and a young man with dark connections is charged. What looks like an open-and-shut case to most people doesn’t to defense attorney Paul Madriani. He believes that there is much more to the case and that the defendant is a pawn caught in the middle, being scapegoated by circumstance.

As the trial spirals toward its conclusion, Madriani and his partner, Harry Hinds, race to find the missing Jefferson letter–and the secrets it holds about slavery and scandal at the time of our nation’s founding and the very reason Scarborough was killed. Madriani’s chase takes him from the tension-filled courtroom in California to the trail of a high court justice now suddenly in hiding and lays bare the soaring political stakes for a seat on the highest court, in a country divided, and under the shadow of power.

On a barely related note, earlier this week a contestant on the syndicated version of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” failed to reach the big money rounds when she answered that John Paul Stevens is the Chief Justice of the United States. And that occurred after she used the fifty-fifty lifeline, which eliminated Samuel A. Alito, Jr. and another of his non-Chief colleagues from the running.

Eighth Circuit rejects for lack of standing a constitutional challenge to a South Dakota public school district’s refusal to provide busing for students of a private religious school located within the school district’s boundaries: You can access today’s ruling, in what the court describes as a “Blaine Amendment”-related challenge, at this link.

In blog-related and non-blog-related updates: “How Appealing” is on the verge of moving to a new web host. The address to reach this page will remain unchanged, so if all goes smoothly readers will not notice any disruption.

Many thanks go to rubystudio, which has done a fine job hosting “How Appealing” since this blog became affiliated with the now-defunct Legal Affairs magazine. The Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania-based pair Networks will officially become this blog’s new web host sometime before the end of this month.

In the unlikely event that this page were to become temporarily inaccessible during the switchover, new posts will temporarily appear at the “How Appealing (Back-up Page)” blog. Readers may wish to make a note of that back-up page’s address now, because you’ll only need that page’s address if this page is inaccessible, and if this page is inaccessible you won’t be able to access that page’s address from here.

In non-blog-related news, this Sunday my son and I will travel to Washington, D.C. to make our first visit to the brand new National Park, where we will watch the Washington Nationals host the Milwaukee Brewers. In honor of Seventh Circuit Judge Terence T. Evans, we plan to root for the Brewers, and my son may even wear his Prince Fielder T-shirt (while, thanks to another law blogger, I’ll probably wear my Columbus Clippers T-shirt). In any event, if any Washington, D.C.-area fans of the blog plan to be at the game, I hope you’ll say hello.

“Suit puts state Supreme Court under a cloud”: This editorial appears today in The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania.

“Rendell will nominate new candidates for Pennsylvania judicial posts”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Gov. Ed Rendell says he will not renominate the four candidates who were rejected by the Senate last week to fill temporary openings on the state appellate courts. Instead, he said Thursday he will send the names of new candidates to the Senate as early as next week. He would not say in advance who they are.”

“Thong-Clad Protesters Stripped of Civil Rights Suit”: Shannon P. Duffy has this article online today at law.com.

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

“Religious Group Questions Fla. Judicial Ethics Code; Conservative advocacy group challenges rule requiring judges to recuse if they took position on an issue in campaign”: law.com provides a report that begins, “Today, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear a case that tests how far states may go in telling judicial candidates how to deal with public interest group questionnaires they receive during campaigns.”

“Volkswagen Challenges Texas Judge Ruling the Most Patent Suits”: Bloomberg News provides this report on a case argued yesterday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

And in other coverage, law.com provides a report headlined “Will the 5th Circuit Ground an Eastern District of Texas Rocket Docket? Federal appeals court hears arguments in high-stakes case involving judge’s discretion in weighing transfer motion.”

“Supreme Court swats down fly-in-the-water case”: The Toronto Globe and Mail on Friday will contain an article that begins, “The Supreme Court of Canada has swatted down a $341,775 damages award to a hairdresser from Windsor, Ont., who became depressed and phobic after finding a dead fly in his bottled water. In a 9-0 judgment Thursday, the court said Culligan of Canada Ltd. cannot be found liable for psychological damages suffered by Waddah (Martin) Mustapha because it could not have reasonably foreseen his extreme reaction to finding the fly.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Top court overturns dead fly-in-water damage claim.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada at this link.

Back in March, I had this post about the oral argument of the case.

“Police cleared in arresting thong-clad protesters”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “State police acted reasonably in arresting six nearly naked demonstrators who posed as Abu-Ghraib prisoners during a 2004 campaign stop by President George W. Bush, a federal appeals court said Thursday. The three-judge panel, upholding a lower court decision, said the officers enjoy qualified immunity from the protesters’ claims of free-speech and liberty violations.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link.

“Court commutes death sentence hours before execution”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides this news update.