“Greenhouse talks Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The Yale Daily News.

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Can McCain or Obama Turn the Supreme Court? Legal scholars predict the outcome on key issues if a U.S. Supreme Court justice steps down in the next four years.”

An en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued last Friday (see my earlier coverage at this link) has resulted in articles headlined “5th Circuit Grants Mandamus on Venue Dispute in Eastern District” and “5th Circuit Ruling Shoots Down IP Rocket Docket.”

An article reports that “Connecticut’s Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Draws on California’s.”

And in other news, “Pa. High Court to Eye Law Firm Partnership Questions.”

“Linda Greenhouse, legendary New York Times reporter looks back on three decades chronicling the Supreme Court–including her run-ins with the journalism ethics police.” Charles Kaiser has this interview at Radar Online.

And the September 2008 issue of The Third Branch newsletter also contained an interview with Linda Greenhouse headlined “Pulitzer Prize Winning Reporter Discusses the Media and the Federal Judiciary.”

“Accused 9/11 planner entitled to a laptop, judge rules”: Today in The Miami Herald, Carol Rosenberg has an article that begins, “Guantanamo guards must furnish confessed al Qaeda kingpin Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his four alleged co-conspirators with enough battery power to use their prison camp laptops 12 hours a day — but the 9/11 accused can’t surf the Internet, a military judge ruled. Marine Col. Ralph Kohlmann, the judge, issued the decision a week ago. It turned up Sunday on a Defense Department website, which under the ruling the men will not be allowed to see live.”

The newspaper has posted the ruling at this link.

“Lawyer challenges city limits on gun sales”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette today contains an article that begins, “An attorney who wants to arrange gun transfers from his East Carson Street office is trying to void city rules on where firearms can be sold in a case that has become a cause celebre for the National Rifle Association.”

“Gay Marriage Ruling Ended Long Journey Of Soul”: Yesterday’s edition of The Hartford Courant contained this lengthy article.

“Abortion Rights on the Ballot, Again”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

In commentary available online from FindLaw: Edward Lazarus has an essay entitled “The Supreme Court, the Election, and the Recession: How Does the Court Fit In, and How Might Changing Circumstances Change the Court and Its Role?”

And Steve Sanders has an essay entitled “American Legal Conservatives Oppose the Citation of Foreign Law, But What About the Hallowed Practice of Citing to Blackstone?”

“More judges under investigation; Experts call 5 ongoing probes of federal jurists unprecedented”: The Houston Chronicle today contains a front page article that begins, “U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent is the first federal judge to be indicted for alleged federal sex crimes, but he’s only the latest in a string of jurists to face misconduct allegations in 2008, for behavior such as frequenting a topless club or lying under oath. Nationwide, four other federal judges are being investigated for, among other things, taking cash from lawyers, using an escort service, posting nude photos on a personal Web site and abusing power in court.”

“We do not, by our decision today, intend to establish any general rule for personal jurisdiction in the internet context.” So writes a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in the eighth footnote to a ruling issued last Friday in a case involving a claim for trademark infringement arising out of the defendant’s allegedly unauthorized use of the plaintiff’s name, photograph, and apparent endorsement of the defendant on a web site.

Footnote eight continues: “Our holding, as always, is limited to the facts before us. We hold only that where the internet is used as a vehicle for the deliberate, intentional misappropriation of a specific individual’s trademarked name or likeness and that use is aimed at the victim’s state of residence, the victim may hale the infringer into that state to obtain redress for the injury. The victim need not travel to the state where the website was created or the infringer resides to obtain relief.”

“On the Road? Case Involving Judge’s Discretion In Weighing Transfer Motion Could Affect Eastern District Filings.” In the May 26, 2008 of Texas Lawyer, John Council had an article that begins, “In a mandamus case that could significantly alter one of the hottest federal civil dockets in Texas, the full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on May 22 over whether a trial judge’s discretion should be limited when a party moves to transfer venue. The stakes in In Re: Volkswagen are huge, because the case could end up stemming the tide of product liability suits filed in the Eastern District of Texas.”

Last Friday, the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its ruling in the case. By a vote of 10-7, the en banc court has ruled that “a writ of mandamus should issue directing the transfer of this case from the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas–which has no connection to the parties, the witnesses, or the facts of this case–to the Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas–which has extensive connections to the parties,”

“Rape victim studying science of memory after man dies serving wrongful sentence”: The Dallas Morning News today contains an article that begins, “Michele Mallin said she was ‘100 percent sure’ when she identified Timothy Brian Cole as the man who raped her. Her resolve never wavered, Ms. Mallin said, until she learned last May that DNA testing had invalidated her 1985 identification. The revelation came nearly nine years after Mr. Cole died at 39 in a Texas prison from an asthma attack.”

The newspaper also contains related articles headlined “Faulty eyewitness convictions date to early 1900s“; “Eyewitnesses still play key roles in cases where DNA, other evidence is lacking“; “18 Dallas County cases overturned by DNA relied on heavily eyewitness testimony“; “Police have a history of violating photo lineup best practices“; “DNA exoneree was mistakenly identified twice in one day“; and “DNA exoneree fell victim to ‘drive-by’ identification.”

“Gableman’s calls from DA office under investigation; Justice says calls to fund-raisers were not political”: Today’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains an article that begins, “Already facing possible discipline from a Judicial Commission complaint, state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman also is now under investigation by the Office of Lawyer Regulation for long-distance calls to campaign fund-raisers and donors from his office when he was a district attorney.”

And The Wisconsin State Journal reports today that “Wisconsin Supreme Court campaigns will change, observers say.”

“Others seek to take over chief judge’s 5-to-9 job”: The Associated Press provides this report from New York State.

“‘One Dollar for Every West Virginian’: The crazy judicial corruption case that the Supreme Court should hear.” Law Professor Amanda Frost has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Sentencing Panel Mulls Alternatives to Prison”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “As the nation’s inmate population climbs toward 2.5 million, the U.S. Sentencing Commission is considering alternatives to prison for some offenders, including treatment programs for nonviolent drug users and employment training for minor parole violators.”

“Draft signup rules unfair to men? A lawsuit against the federal government is raising the argument that the Selective Service System has violated the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against men.” The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette today contains this lengthy article, the first in a three-part series.

And a related article is headlined “No draft, but boards are poised and ready.”

“Guantanamo prosecutor who quit had ‘grave misgivings’ about fairness; Convinced that key evidence was being withheld from the defense, Lt. Col. Darrel J. Vandeveld went from being a ‘true believer to someone who felt truly deceived’ by the tribunals”: This front page article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

And the newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “The shadow of Gitmo: The next president must act to help America reclaim its principles.”

“A Guantanamo Homecoming: It will be harder to tune them out when they are not just nameless men behind barbed wire.” Dahlia Lithwick will have this essay in the October 20, 2008 issue of Newsweek.

“BALCO sentence could be good news for Bonds”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Lance Williams has an article that begins, “In a rebuff to the prosecutors targeting Barry Bonds, a federal judge refused Friday to imprison a former bicycle racer for lying to the grand jury that investigated the BALCO scandal.”

And The New York Times reports today that “Cyclist Avoids Prison Time, Which May Benefit Bonds.”

“The Navy, Whales and the Court”: The New York Times contains this editorial today.

“U.S. Supreme Court Is Asked to Fix Troubled West Virginia Justice System”: Adam Liptak will have this article Sunday in The New York Times.

“State Supreme Court Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage”: This article appears today in The Hartford Courant, along with articles headlined “High Emotions On Both Sides Of Gay Marriage Case” and “Catholic Bishops Urge ‘Yes’ Vote On Constitutional Convention.”

Today’s edition of The New Haven Register contains articles headlined “In controversial ruling, state supreme court says gay marriage ban is unconstitutional” and “State is 3rd in nation to take historic step.”

The Boston Globe reports that “Conn. ruling allows same-sex marriage; Activists rejoice following sharply divided opinion.”

The New York Times reports that “Gay Marriage Is Ruled Legal in Connecticut.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Separate Is Not Equal.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Connecticut justices give gays right to marry; The high court says allowing same-sex couples only civil unions is not full equality.”

And The Washington Post reports that “Conn. Ban On Gay Marriage Reversed; State’s High Court Issues 4-3 Ruling.”

In this post from yesterday, I provided links to yesterday’s majority and dissenting opinions of the Supreme Court of Connecticut.

The Associated Press is reporting: Mark Sherman has an article headlined “Court considers case on judicial ethics” that begins, “Supreme Court justices regularly confront cases involving companies they own shares in or that employ a family member. The decision is easy – the justices have a conflict of interest that forces them to play no role in the case. But what happens when the issue is less clear and a judge has the appearance of a conflict, but no personal stake in the outcome of a dispute? The court is considering a case that asks whether the Constitution requires judges to step aside in that instance.”

And in other news, “Okla. abortion ultrasound requirement challenged.”

Philadelphia Phillies 8, Los Angeles Dodgers 5: This afternoon, my son and I were at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia to watch game two of the National League Championship Series.

Following last night’s tense, come-from-behind 3-2 Phillies victory, today’s game saw the Phillies prevail by a more comfortable three-run margin, although the home team again had to come from behind to win. Moreover, the Phillies had enjoyed an 8-2 lead for just a few moments before Manny Ramirez hit a three-run line drive homer to left field in the top of the fourth inning. Both teams were held scoreless in their final five half-innings at bat, and as a result the Phillies take a two games to none lead to the west coast, where game three will be played Sunday night.

If the NLCS returns to Philadelphia, my son and I plan to be there, given that we also have tickets to games six and seven of this series. And we are cautiously optimistic that we will be able to actually use our Phillies World Series tickets this year.

You can access the box score of this afternoon’s NLCS game at this link, while wraps are available here and here.

“High Court Grants Gay Marriage Rights”: The Hartford Courant provides a news update that begins, “Same-sex couples won the right to marry in Connecticut in an historic ruling by the Supreme Court today. Citing the equal protection clause of the state constitution, the justices ruled that civil unions were discriminatory. In a 4-3 decision released at 11:30 a.m., the majority wrote that the state’s ‘understanding of marriage must yield to a more contemporary appreciation of the rights entitled to constitutional protection.'”

And The Associated Press reports that “Conn. high court rules same-sex couples can marry.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Connecticut consists of a majority opinion and three dissenting opinions (here, here, and here).

“[U]nder what circumstances can a Chinese national rely on the birth of more than one child to demonstrate the well-founded fear of persecution necessary to qualify for asylum as a ‘refugee’?” A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has today issued a lengthy opinion addressing that question.

“State Supreme Court To Rule On Gay Marriage Case”: The Hartford Courant provides a news update that begins, “The Connecticut Supreme Court is poised today to rule on a landmark gay marriage case that could fundamentally change the social landscape of the state. The court will decide if the state constitution grants same-sex couples the right to marry, an issue the state legislature has flirted with in recent years after approving civil unions in 2005.”

According to the web site of the Supreme Court of Connecticut, the decision is scheduled to be “Released after 11:30 a.m.”

“Prosecutor’s bid to force recusal of judge rejected; Jurist’s ties to DeLay fail to sway court of appeals”: The Houston Chronicle contains this article today.

“The Terrorists Next Door: Justice Kennedy’s consequences.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Bars of trouble: Cell phones in jail.” Today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Torsten Ove has an article that begins, “People in jail aren’t supposed to have cell phones. But across America, one way or another, they’re getting them.”

“Nassau’s ‘Wall of Shame’ defendant sues”: Today’s edition of Newsday contains an article that begins, “One of the defendants on Nassau’s drunken driving Wall of Shame has sued the county, demanding that her name and photograph be removed from the online gallery of defendants because it’s unconstitutional. Attorney Brian Griffin of Garden City says that by posting the names and mug shots of people who are arrested on drunken driving charges, County Executive Thomas Suozzi is punishing people who have not yet been found guilty of a crime.”

“Troopergate findings are due today; Legislative Council will decide on release”: The Anchorage Daily News today contains an article that begins, “The Alaska Supreme Court has cleared for possible release to the public today the Legislature’s highly anticipated investigative report on whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power. The court Thursday rejected an attempt by a group of six Republican legislators to keep the report into the so-called Troopergate affair from being made public.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Alaska Supreme Court order appears at this link.

In the new issue of The Harvard Law Record: The publication contains articles headlined “Justice Scalia defends originalism” and “Kevorkian reconsiders 9th amendment.”

“Remembering Cooper v. Aaron, the Supreme Court Case That Sent the Message that Brown‘s Promise of Desegregation Must Be Kept”: Carl Tobias has this essay online at FindLaw.