“Equal-rights gains have local roots”: This front page article about the U.S. Supreme Court‘s ruling in Oyama v. California (1948) appears today in The San Diego Union-Tribune.

“The judge zips her lip as court marches right”: Today in The Oregonian, columnist Susan Nielsen has an essay that begins, “She had me at hello. She lost me at ‘Canadian legal system.’ Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in a packed concert hall in Portland last week, rebuffed the audience’s eager questions about Bush v. Gore and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She stuck instead to her script about international law, dishing so few personal opinions that she violated my constitutional right to be entertained.”

“Top court to weigh roadside searches; Will consider when police need warrants”: Kate Coscarelli has this article today in The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger.

“The Candidates and the Court”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

And last Thursday in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, columnist Linda P. Campbell had an op-ed entitled “Constitutional protection of individual and privacy issues is an ongoing and central issue before the Supreme Court.”

“Are campaign contributors buying justice?” Today’s issue of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains an article that begins, “For 10 years, Hugh Caperton, a financially debilitated coal producer from southern West Virginia, and the Pittsburgh attorneys who represent him have waged a courtroom war against Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship, one of West Virginia’s most powerful businessmen. Their next battle could be fought in the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Caperton claims he was denied a fair hearing in West Virginia’s highest court, which he says was under the influence of Mr. Blankenship.”

“Terrorism Financing Case Back in Court; Government Again Will Try to Link Texas Charity to Militant Group Hamas”: Sunday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain this article.

“S. Dakota Readies Again for Abortion Fight”: This article will appear Sunday in The Washington Post.

“Pentagon shifts brass at Guantanamo war court”: Carol Rosenberg has this article today in The Miami Herald.

The Washington Post reports today that “Guantanamo Trials’ Overseer Reassigned; Many Angry That He Remains at All.”

And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Guantanamo war-crime trials advisor is reassigned; Military judges in three separate cases had barred Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann from further participation in various aspects of the military commissions.”

“Tracking Marshall’s Steps to the Supreme Court; Exhibit Reveals Justice’s Diplomacy”: This article about Justice Thurgood Marshall appears today in The Washington Post.

You can learn more about the exhibit via this link.

“Judge orders Cheney to preserve records”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press has an article that begins, “A federal judge on Saturday ordered Dick Cheney to preserve a wide range of the records from his time as vice president. The decision by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is a setback for the Bush administration in its effort to promote a narrow definition of materials that must be safeguarded under by the Presidential Records Act.”

And Sunday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain an article headlined “Cheney Is Told to Keep Official Records; Judge’s Order Responds to Suit Filed by Open-Government Advocates, Historians.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“No more Bush-league judges”: Attorneys Leonard Feldman and Tom Burt had this op-ed yesterday in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

“Court upholds 2,000-foot rule against sex offender”: Today’s edition of The Gazette of Cedar Rapids, Iowa contains an article that begins, “The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday ruled that a sex offender was not discriminated against when he was charged with violating a residency rule that he claimed was not in effect when he bought his house.”

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

“Wittig attorneys seek delay; U.S. Supreme Court will review case’s merit”: The Capital-Journal of Topeka, Kansas today contains an article that begins, “Attorneys for David Wittig on Friday sought to block the possibility of him being sent back to prison before the U.S. Supreme Court decides if it will review his case. The attorneys asked an appeals court to delay implementation of a ruling it issued earlier this week that opened the door for the former Westar Energy executive’s return to prison.”

“After Va.’s Losses In Court, a Flurry Of Finger-Pointing”: Saturday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain an article that begins, “The Virginia Supreme Court’s rejection of an anti-spam law is the state’s latest high-profile legal defeat, a string of losses that some lawyers see as coincidental but others say reflects the General Assembly’s willingness to pass aggressive measures that are more likely to face a constitutional challenge.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “ACLU asks high court to hear enemy combatant case“; “Pentagon moves Gitmo legal official amid criticism“; and “Transsexual wins federal discrimination lawsuit” (access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link).

That’s why they call it the “long conference”: Late yesterday, “SCOTUSblog” posted this lengthy list of “Petitions to Watch” at the U.S. Supreme Court‘s conference of September 29, 2008. There are certainly some interesting cases on that list.

“President’s domestic detention power tested”: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post that begins, “Lawyers for the only detainee seized by the military inside the U.S. and still in captivity urged the Supreme Court on Friday to rule that no federal law and no part of the Constitution allows the President to order such detentions.”

You can access the petition for writ of certiorari filed today in Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli by clicking here.

“Cable, led by Cablevision, mulls network DVR”: The Associated Press provides this appellate-related report.

Krazy khat: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this interesting opinion today addressing what the federal government must prove to subject a criminal defendant to a lengthy prison term on a conviction for possessing khat.

“You Tube taser video: The 11th Circuit should be ashamed.” At her blog “Ride The Lightning,” attorney Sharon Nelson today has a post that begins, “My brother is a cop. I am part of the extended family of cops who worry constantly about what might happen to the person in uniform that they love. But there’s no free pass for being a cop — no ‘get out of jail’ free card when you abuse the Constitution. And when an appellate court of the United States sanctions that conduct, I start to hear Nero fiddling while Rome burns.”

Is a suspect’s ostensibly admitting to having engaged in child molestation sufficient, without more, to establish probable cause to search that suspect’s home for child pornography? In a ruling issued today, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit answers “no.”

“Agency and Bush Are Sued Over Domestic Surveillance”: The New York Times contains this article today.

And yesterday, the organization Electronic Frontier Foundation issued a news release headlined “EFF Sues NSA, President Bush, and Vice President Cheney to Stop Illegal Surveillance; New Legal Challenge to Unconstitutional Domestic Spying.” You can access the complaint initiating suit by clicking here.

“Anthrax Suspicions: Why an independent look at the FBI probe is essential.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.

“Taser keeps attackers, liability lawsuits at bay”: The St. Petersburg Times contains this article today.

“Stripper’s private dancing lands DeKalb lawyer in hot water; State commission suspends him 15 months for accepting nude dances as partial payment for her legal fees, report says”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

“Nichols’ team balks over forensic expert”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution today contains an article that begins, “Brian Nichols is accused of murdering four people after escaping from a Fulton County Courthouse holding cell during his rape trial in 2005. In one of those deaths, the only living witness to the killing is Nichols himself. And prosecutors have an expert who says that they don’t buy Nichols’ version of events in the shooting death of David Wilhelm, an off-duty U.S. Customs agent.”

“Gun Lobby First”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial that begins, “The House stampeded past serious public safety concerns and the democratic rights of residents of the District of Columbia on Wednesday to approve a bill that would gut sensible gun controls in the nation’s capital.”

“Wecht lawyers want to petition high court”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette today contains an article that begins, “Attorneys for former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril H. Wecht have requested a stay from the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals so they can petition the U.S. Supreme Court to consider their client’s case.”

And today in The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Jason Cato reports that “Wecht seeks to appeal case to U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Task force named for judge inquiry; Jurist Porteous is facing impeachment”: This article appears today in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.

Take that, Seventh Circuit! Today in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article headlined “A Nadler Bill Would Legalize Mezuzahs.”

The article begins, “Under legislation just introduced in Congress, residents of condominiums and co-ops would be guaranteed the right to post religious displays, such as the mezuzahs installed by observant Jews, outside apartment doors. The bill, formally proposed on Wednesday by Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, would effectively overturn a federal appeals court’s ruling in July that a condominium board in Chicago had the right to remove mezuzahs that a building resident repeatedly posted.”

You can view the text of the proposed “Freedom of Religious Expression in the Home Act of 2008” by clicking here.

My earlier coverage of the Seventh Circuit’s ruling, which issued on July 10, 2008, appears at this link.

“Mistaken Authority: Congress should say no to Bush’s last-gasp bid for more executive power.” Neal Katyal and Justin Florence have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“In the Founders’ own words”: Justice Don R. Willett of the Supreme Court of Texas had this op-ed last Friday in The Austin American-Statesman.

“Irregular Panels”: Law Professor Samuel P. Jordan has posted this article online at SSRN (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

The article’s syllabus begins, “This article explores a common but essentially unexplored feature of appellate decision-making: decisions by irregular panels. Decisions in the federal courts of appeals are usually reached by panels of three statutorily authorized judges.”

“Drug Label, Maimed Patient and Test for Justices”: Adam Liptak will have this article Friday in The New York Times.

“Government seeks appeal of Indian trust case”: The Associated Press provides this report.