“Court: Religious objection won’t stop DNA sampling.” Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

My earlier coverage of today’s D.C. Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Court upholds conviction for videotaping nude girlfriend”: The Wisconsin State Journal provides a news update that begins, “In a decision that will have an impact on a similar Dane County case, a state appeals court ruled Tuesday that it was illegal for a former Waunakee High School teacher to secretly videotape his then-girlfriend in the nude, even though she was willingly nude in front of him.”

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Wis. court: Nude people still have privacy rights.”

You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals at this link.

“Sex Offender Keeps Law License”: At his “New York Personal Injury Law Blog” today, Eric Turkewitz has a post that begins, “In a decision released today, a sharply divided panel of the Appellate Division, First Department determined that an admitted sex offender will keep his New York law license.” The court’s ruling can be accessed here.

“Doe v. SexSearch Affirmed by 6th Circuit, But Not on 230 Grounds”: Eric Goldman has this post at his “Technology & Marketing Law Blog.”

My earlier coverage of today’s Sixth Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“This case is finito.” So ends an opinion that Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner issued today in typescript form on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of that court.

A sentence of 28 years to life imprisonment under California’s “Three Strikes” law for failing to update annual sex offender registration within five working days of one’s birthday violates the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment: So holds a mostly conservative three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in an opinion issued today.

Update: At his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Doug Berman has this post about the ruling.

“Group sues to reinstate firearms ban”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sued the Bush administration Tuesday in hopes of stopping a new policy that would allow people to carry concealed, loaded guns in most national parks and wildlife refuges.”

Via the Brady Campaign’s web site, you can access a news release titled “Brady Campaign Sues Interior Department Over Rule Allowing Concealed Guns In Parks,
Will Seek Injunction” and the complaint initiating suit.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has today issued a decision making it much more difficult to grant class certification in antitrust cases: Because the decision is not yet available over that court’s web site, I have uploaded a copy of today’s ruling in In re: Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation at this link.

Update: The opinion is now also available via the Third Circuit’s web site at this link.

D.C. Circuit rejects prisoner’s challenge under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has today issued its ruling in John Doe v. SexSearch.com: The opinion begins:

Pseudonymous plaintiff John Doe appeals the dismissal of his complaint against defendant, SexSearch.com (“SexSearch”), an online adult dating service that facilitates sexual encounters between its members. Doe used SexSearch to meet Jane Roe, who described herself as an eighteen-year-old female. The two met and had sexual relations. Roe, it turned out, was actually fourteen years old, and Doe was consequently arrested and charged with three counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. In an unusual case of first impression, Doe then filed suit against SexSearch, alleging an array of violations under Ohio law, most of which are variations on the claim that SexSearch is at fault for Doe’s sexual relationship with a minor and the harm that resulted from his arrest.

In summarizing today’s holding, the court explains, “Because we agree with the district court that Doe’s complaint failed to state a claim, we do not reach the question of whether the Communications Decency Act provides SexSearch with immunity from suit. We do not adopt the district court’s discussion of the Act, which would read section 230 more broadly than any previous Court of Appeals decision has read it, potentially abrogating all state- or common-law causes of action brought against interactive Internet services.” The district court’s opinion granting defendants’ motion to dismiss can be accessed here.

You can access the plaintiff’s complaint initiating this lawsuit at this link. You can access defendants’ motion to dismiss at this link. Plaintiff’s response to the motion to dismiss can be accessed here, while defendants’ reply brief in support of the motion to dismiss can be viewed at this link.

Justin Bourne of Adult Video News covered the federal district court’s decision dismissing the lawsuit in an article headlined “U.S. Judge rules in Favor of SexSearch; Federal court dismisses ‘negligence’ claim against networking and dating sites.” [Caution — article contains images that are not work-safe.] And more recently, in covering the appellate proceeding, Bourne had a blog post titled “Sex Search Files Appellate Brief in U.S. Court of Appeals; Company urges court to deny appeal against lawsuit’s dismissal.”

“Lawsuit begins with end of parrot; Inmates’ rights questioned after man not allowed to make call”: Yesterday’s edition of The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware contained an article that begins, “The death of Freddy the parrot could be debated in federal courts. It also could raise questions about the right of the accused to get ‘one phone call’ after being arrested.” (Via “Obscure Store.”)

“Fate of inmates unsettled if Gitmo closes; Terror experts assess options, risks to U.S.” This article appears today in USA Today.

And online at FindLaw, Joanne Mariner has an essay entitled “Advice to Obama on Closing Guantanamo.”

“State Supreme Court rules those on probation must tell officers about any pet they own”: The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, California today contains an article that begins, “Whether it’s Fluffy or Fido, probationers must tell probation officers about any pet they own, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday. The decision kills a 2005 challenge from San Bernardino County Superior Court saying that the pets requirement was too general. In the opinion, the court cited the need to protect probation officers from dangerous animals when they check on probationers.”

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

Available online from law.com: Shannon P. Duffy of The Legal Intelligencer reports that “3rd Circuit Slashes Punitives, Imposes 1-1 Ratio.” You can access at this link last week’s non-precedential ruling of a two-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

And in other news, an article is headlined “Will Famed Rocket Docket Fizzle Out in Wake of Federal Circuit Ruling? Texas court slapped down for holding onto case; ruling bolsters recent 5th Circuit order.”

“Bush has successfully defended anti-terrorism policies; Domestic surveillance, rounding up Muslim men after Sept. 11, harsh interrogations — the administration has beat back nearly all legal challenges to its controversial programs”: David G. Savage has this front page news analysis today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Civil rights pioneer leaving appellate bench”: This article appears today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“In N.C., death penalty gets rarer; In the 31 years since the punishment was reinstated, the numbers of death cases heard and sentences handed out have steeply declined”: The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina today contains an article that begins, “North Carolina will finish this year with just one defendant sentenced to death, a record low since the penalty was reinstated 31 years ago.”