Would you like to be the next Chief Judge of the State of New York? Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article headlined “Help Wanted: State Seeking Its Next Chief Judge.”

“After Nine’s Gun Ruling, N.Y.’s Gun Laws May Be Next; City’s Restrictions Described as ‘Good Target’ for Suit”: Joseph Goldstein has this article today in The New York Sun. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to issue additional opinions in argued cases in about ten minutes from now.

“Rendell’s wife to investigate California judge”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an article that begins, “A panel of federal judges, including Gov. Rendell’s wife, has been appointed to conduct a judicial-misconduct inquiry of a well-known California judge caught up in a flap about sexually explicit images on a Web site bearing his name. The investigation will focus on Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which handles federal appeals for Western states, Hawaii, and Alaska.”

Online at The Los Angeles Times, John Wright has an essay entitled “What porn says about the man: Alex Kozinski isn’t a hypocrite or a disgrace to the judicial bench; He’s normal.”

And Google News has posted online a comment written by Cyrus Sanai.

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Justice Breyer and the Brits.”

And in other news, “At Liberal Confab, Experts Discuss Detainee Issues, the DOJ; American Constitution Society kicks off annual convention with discussions, high-profile guests.”

“Guantanamo Bay detainees have rights. Now what?” The Associated Press provides this report.

One year later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit again holds that the Tampa Sports Authority should be allowed to conduct pat-down searches of all ticket holders seeking to attend Tampa Bay Buccaneers home games: The Eleventh Circuit today issued this ruling on panel rehearing.

Back on June 26, 2007, the same three-judge panel issued an opinion reaching the same result. My coverage of that ruling appears at this link.

I criticized the panel’s original ruling in an installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com headlined “Did a Federal Appeals Court Avoid Tackling the Real Issues Behind Football Fan’s Lawsuit? 11th Circuit rules that season ticket-holder can’t object to being searched upon entering stadium.” At first glance, it appears that my criticism of that ruling remains applicable to today’s ruling on panel rehearing.

“This is a patent infringement case pertaining to wall-mounted telephones designed for use by prison inmates.” So begins a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

“Your boss shouldn’t read your text or e-mail messages without an OK, court says; The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of an Ontario police officer whose messages were obtained by the Police Department and reviewed without his permission”: Maura Dolan will have this article Thursday in The Los Angeles Times.

The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin provides a news update headlined “Court rules Ontario police violated officers’ privacy.”

And at Electronic Frontier Foundation’s “Deeplinks Blog,” Jennifer Granick has a post titled “New Ninth Circuit Case Protects Text Message Privacy From Police and Employers.”

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

First Circuit can’t duck this trademark infringement dispute: Boston Business Journal has a news update headlined “Super Duck Excursions gains in fight against Boston Duck Tours” that begins, “Super Duck Excursions can return to using ‘duck tours’ in its marketing material and its logo of a cartoon duck, after a preliminary injunction was overturned Wednesday.”

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

Slow news day: ABA Journal has a post titled “Legal Blogger Auditions for ‘Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?’”

Programming note: My son and I will be at Citizens Bank Park this afternoon to see the Philadelphia Phillies host the Boston Red Sox. A preview of the pitching match-up can be accessed here while previews of the game can be accessed via this link. Additional posts will appear later today.

“Campaigns in a Skirmish Over Terrorism and Law”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And The Washington Post reports today that “Candidates Clash on Terrorism; In Sharp Exchange, Each Side Calls Other’s Position a Risk.”

“The Court McCain Wants”: Today in The Washington Post, columnist Ruth Marcus has an op-ed that begins, “Conservatives, seizing on the Supreme Court’s ruling last week on Guantanamo detainees, want to turn the court into election fodder. I hope they succeed.”

“Ex-Bush Aide Gets New Trial on Appeal; Judges Toss Charges Against Safavian, Convicted in 2006 in Abramoff Scandal”: The Washington Post contains this article today.

The New York Times reports today that “Appeals Court Overturns Conviction of a Former Official Linked to Abramoff.”

And McClatchy Newspapers report that “Appellate court tosses out key conviction in Abramoff case.”

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

“CIA Played Larger Role In Advising Pentagon; Harsh Interrogation Methods Defended”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.

Also today in The Washington Post, Dana Milbank’s “Washington Sketch” column is headlined “Abu Ghraib? Doesn’t Ring a Bell.” It begins, “If ever there was a case that cried out for enhanced interrogation techniques, it was yesterday’s Senate appearance by the Pentagon’s former top lawyer. William ‘Jim’ Haynes II, the man who blessed the use of dogs, hoods and nudity to pry information out of recalcitrant detainees, proved to be a model of evasion himself as he resisted all attempts at inquiry by the Armed Services Committee.”

And The New York Times reports today that “Notes Show Confusion on Interrogation Methods.”

“Claim Over Red Cross Symbol Is Settled”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “The American Red Cross and Johnson & Johnson, the health care conglomerate, announced Tuesday that they had settled a longstanding dispute over use of the Red Cross trademark. The two sides announced the settlement a month after Judge Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan threw out much of J.& J.’s trademark claim against the relief organization.”

This blog’s earlier coverage of that ruling appears at this link.

“BCE’s fate in court’s hands”: Today’s edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail contains an article that begins, “Guy Du Pont had 40 minutes to sell Canada’s largest takeover to the country’s highest court Tuesday, and it wasn’t an easy ride. BCE Inc.’s battle to save its $35-billion takeover had taken it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, and for its last say the company gave the floor to the Montreal constitutional and corporate lawyer, a new recruit to its large legal team, to see whether he could get the deal back on track.”

Today’s newspaper also contains an article headlined “The country’s hottest ticket — BCE and the Supremes.”

Death and Texas: The Houston Chronicle reports today that “Austin judge finds inmate sane enough for execution; More appeals are likely in the landmark case.”

And news from a case involving another death row inmate, The Austin American-Statesman reports today that “After legal wrangle, state halts execution; Death warrant suspended, reinstated, suspended again.”

“Mr. Bush v. the Bill of Rights”: The New York Times contains this editorial today.

“Court upholds 24-month prison term for ex-Westar executive”: This article appears today in The Kansas City Star.

And The Topeka Capital-Journal today contains an article headlined “Court to Wittig: Go back to prison; Wittig loses sentencing appeal, expected to serve 12 more months.”

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

“Mukasey Oversees Role Reversal of Prosecutors, Defense”: Joseph Goldstein has this interesting article today in The New York Sun.

“Palimony ruling sets precedent in Jersey; Justices: Cohabitation is not the only factor.” Today’s edition of The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contains an article that begins, “In a decision described as the first of its type in the nation, the state Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a couple does not have to live together in order for one partner to sue the other for palimony after a breakup.”

And law.com reports that “Cohabitation Not a Requirement for Palimony Claim, Says N.J. Supreme Court.”

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

“Has Judge Kozinski’s View of Blogs Changed?” This post appears today at “Patterico’s Pontifications.”

The answer to that question is “yes,” and the implication is that he thinks much more highly of the medium now.

“3rd Circuit’s Chief Judge to Head Inquiry Into Actions of 9th Circuit’s Kozinski”: law.com’s Shannon P. Duffy has this report.

And Jaikumar Vijayan of Computerworld has an article headlined “Federal judge a victim of privacy breach or poor judgment? Depends (perhaps) on what you’re calling a Web site.”

“Guantanamo war crimes court back in session”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Copyright ruling is blow to Utah company”: Pamela Manson of The Salt Lake Tribune has a news update that begins, “Hired to create depictions of Toyota vehicles for the automotive giant’s advertising campaign, a small Utah company used the relatively new technology of digital modeling. After 80 to 100 hours of effort per vehicle, Meshwerks produced two-dimensional wire-frame depictions that appear three-dimensional on screen. The idea was to create a product that resembled each car or truck model as closely as possible for use on the Toyota Web site and in other media. The resulting unadorned images, which had no color, shading or other details, were accurate. So accurate that a federal court has ruled these depictions have no right to copyright protection.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, written by Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, at this link.

Today is day three of the McClatchy Newspapers series “Guantanamo: Beyond the Law.” Today’s lead article is headlined “Militants found recruits among Guantanamo’s wrongly detained.” And today’s other articles are headlined “Ex-detainees allege that U.S. troops abused Quran” and “Documents confirm U.S. hid detainees from Red Cross.”

You can access the articles from the first two days of this series via my earlier posts here and here.

“Appeals court upholds 24-month prison sentence for former Westar Energy CEO in bank fraud case”: The Associated Press provides this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued today.

And at his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Doug Berman has a post titled “Third time’s (almost) the charm in Tenth Circuit sentencing case.”

“The Supreme Court Goes to War”: Law Professor John Yoo has this op-ed today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Who Wants to Be an Appellate Law Blogger”: This afternoon, at my wife’s urging, I traveled to New York City to audition to be a contestant on season seven of the syndicated game show “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.”

For those who are concerned about whether the author of this blog has an adequate grasp of trivia, I’m pleased to report that I passed the written test portion of the audition and thus was interviewed by one of the show’s producers to evaluate “personality.” The process was a lot of fun, and I thank another person who passed the written test — a woman who lives near Seattle — who kindly volunteered to me that the first thing she thought upon seeing me was that I look like someone who should be on the show.

The results of the interviews are not immediately disclosed at the audition, but, if I also “passed” the interview, I will be receiving a postcard in a few weeks advising that I’m in the contestant pool for this season. And then I can begin to evaluate whether I might be fortunate enough to have a certain public intellectual and prolific author based in Chicago agree to serve as one of my “phone-a-friends.”

If any readers of this post have any questions about the audition process, feel free to ask me about it via email. Finally, it would take a lot more than one million dollars to cause me to walk away from this blog, so fans of this blog have nothing to fear, while critics of this blog are urged to start raising extreme amounts of money immediately.

Programming note: A trip to New York City is on the agenda for this afternoon. Additional posts will appear here this evening.

“US court: New trial for official in Abramoff scandal.” The Associated Press provides this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.

According to the Second Circuit’s chief judge, that court’s “occluded view of our discretion to sit in banc runs counter to the criteria set down for our guidance in Rule 35.” It is notoriously difficult to obtain rehearing en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as I noted recently in this post reporting on the concurrences in and dissents from that court’s denial of rehearing en banc in Ricci v. DeStefano.

The Second Circuit’s order from last Thursday noted that additional concurrences and dissents might be forthcoming, and indeed they have been, Yesterday, Circuit Judge Guido Calabresi issued this concurrence. And today, Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs has issued this must-read dissent harshly criticizing the Second Circuit’s notorious reluctance to grant rehearing en banc.

“Judge Kozinski’s Dutch Uncles”: Tony Mauro has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.” Tony’s post links to: the Ninth Circuit‘s Judicial Council’s order asking the Chief Justice to transfer the misconduct proceeding involving that circuit’s Chief Judge, Alex Kozinski, to another circuit; the Chief Justice’s letter assigning the proceeding to the Third Circuit; and a news release announcing the five judges whom the chair of the Judicial Council of the Third Circuit appointed as a special committee to investigate the matter.

And the blog “Patterico’s Pontifications” today has a lengthy post titled “Cyrus Sanai Responds.”

“Covering The Court: Members of the Supreme Court press corps reviewed major decisions from the 2007-2008 Term, examined trends in Supreme Court jurisprudence, and looked towards the future.” Via this link, you can access lots of interesting video of the programs that occurred at this past weekend’s 2008 American Constitution Society National Convention in Washington, D.C.

The video of the program that is the title of this post, which David Lat covered yesterday in this post at “Above the Law,” can be viewed by clicking here (Windows Media Player required).