“Case against federal judge OK’d; U.S. House to weigh Porteous allegations Porteous impeachment”: This article appears today in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.

And Pamela A. MacLean of The National Law Journal reports that “Federal Judiciary Asks House to Impeach Louisiana Judge.”

“On the record of this case, the police officers violated appellant’s Fourth Amendment rights by unzipping his jacket without his permission and without probable cause or a warrant.” So holds the majority of the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in a lengthy ruling issued today.

Back on April 6, 2007, a three-judge panel reached the opposite result by a 2-1 vote. My coverage of that decision appears at this link.

The dissenter on the three-judge panel is the author of today’s en banc majority opinion, while the author of the three-judge panel’s majority opinion is the author of today’s en banc dissent.

“Appeals court refuses to step into terrorism case”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court Friday refused to intervene in the military commission case against a Canadian detainee.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Limit on review of war crimes issues.”

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

“Philadelphia judge among Rendell’s Pa. court picks”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell on Friday nominated three veteran judges and a former top aide to Gov. Tom Ridge in a deal with Republican senators to finally fill temporary vacancies on Pennsylvania’s appellate courts. Rendell’s pick to fill an opening on the state Supreme Court is Jane Cutler Greenspan, a 20-year Philadelphia common pleas court judge.”

And The Allentown Morning Call provides a news update headlined “Freedberg nominated for Superior Court seat.”

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell today issued a news release headlined “Governor Rendell Announces Nominations for Pennsylvania Statewide Appellate Courts.”

“Federal Judge Rejects 11th Circuit’s Urging That Investment Company Be Punished; Senior U.S. District Court judge again dismisses securities case against Merchant Capital LLC”: law.com provides a report that begins, “Judge Marvin Shoob has again dismissed a fraud case by Atlanta lawyers for the Securities and Exchange Commission against an investment company, despite a strong suggestion from a federal appeals court that the investment company did wrong and deserved to be punished.”

“Guantanamo prisoner opens new era of court challenges”: Michael Doyle and Marisa Taylor of McClatchy Newspapers have this report.

“Surveillance Bill Offers Protection To Telecom Firms; Deal Would Extend U.S. Wiretap Power, Shield Providers Facing Privacy Lawsuits”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.

The New York Times reports today that “Congress Strikes Deal to Overhaul Wiretap Law.”

And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Compromise reached on government wiretaps; The new bill would give spy agencies greater powers and protect phone companies, but it would also require court approvals.”

“Supreme Court voids California union law; The legislation would have blocked employers that received state money from tapping those funds to speak out against labor organizations”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Court rules bosses can speak against unions.”

“Self-Representation by the Mentally Ill Is Curbed”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Supreme Court Rules On Self-Representation; Competence to Stand Trial Is Not Enough.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Justices rule on mentally ill’s right to self-representation.”

law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “Supreme Court Limits Self-Representation by Mentally Ill Defendants.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “High court: limits to defend oneself in court; Justices rule 7 to 2 that some defendants aren’t competent enough to represent themselves.”

The Indianapolis Star contains an article headlined “Court: mentally ill man needed lawyer.”

And yesterday evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Rules in Sanity Case” featuring Nina Totenberg.

“Appeals court rejects copyright claims to Pink Panther story”: The Associated Press provides this report.

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