“We Don’t Need Guantanamo Bay: Here’s how to hold the detainees elsewhere, without damaging U.S. security.” Thomas B. Wilner has this op-ed today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Court rules Coast loan holders were victims”: Saturday’s edition of The Sarasota Herald-Tribune contained an article that begins, “Federal appeals court judges ruled Friday that Coast Bank borrowers were indeed victims in the scheme that involved a former bank executive skimming money from their loans. Federal prosecutors had maintained that it was the bank that was the victim.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court says Florida homeowners also victims.”

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Law Professor Paul Cassell recently had a post titled “All Those Harmed by a Federal Financial Crime Are ‘Victims’ Protected by the Crime Victims’ Rights Act.”

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

Update: At his “Simple Justice” blog, attorney Scott H. Greenfield has an interesting post titled “Everyone’s a Victim, The Sequel.”

“DA must pay freed inmate, appeals court says; He is owed $14 million for 14 years on death row”: The Times-Picayune of New Orleans today contains an article that begins, “The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to toss out a $14 million judgment against the Orleans Parish district attorney’s office that a federal jury awarded last year to former death row inmate John Thompson.”

And The Associated Press reports that “$14 million award to exonerated inmate upheld.”

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

“Nottingham silent on allegations; The ex-judge doesn’t reply to a complaint that threatens his law license”: Last Wednesday in The Denver Post, Felisa Cardona had an article that begins, “Former Chief U.S. District Judge Edward W. Nottingham Jr. did not file a response to misconduct allegations that could put his law license in jeopardy. Sean Harrington, a legal blogger who runs the website knowyourcourts.com, filed a misconduct complaint about the former judge with the Colorado Attorney Regulation Counsel and with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.”

“Supreme Court says husband must pay for bedroom spying”: Today’s edition of The Des Moines Register contains an article that begins, “A Dubuque man who secretly videotaped his wife in their bedroom must pay her $22,500 for invasion of privacy, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday in the couple’s divorce case. The decision upheld two lower-court rulings against Jeffrey Tigges. He contended that his wife, Cathy, had no reasonable expectation of privacy in their home.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Award upheld in videotaping case; During divorce, Dubuque County woman had claimed that her husband invaded her privacy.”

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

“Jerry Brown asks California Supreme Court to void gay-marriage ban; The state attorney general, who had earlier vowed to defend Prop. 8, offers a novel legal theory for why it should be overturned; The action surprises some legal experts”: Jessica Garrison and Maura Dolan have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Brown asks state high court to overturn Prop. 8.”

And The New York Times reports that “Top Lawyer Urges Voiding California Proposition 8.”

“Did Bush officials commit war crimes? Maybe, but trials aren’t likely.” Marisa Taylor of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

“‘Light’ cigarettes and lawsuits: A high court ruling allowing state lawsuits over ‘light’ cigarettes could lead to uneven regulation.” The Los Angeles Times contains this editorial today.

“Pollution Exemption Reversed; Court Strikes Rule That Let Plants Sometimes Exceed Limits”: This article appears today in The Washington Post reporting on a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued yesterday.

“Three Men Freed From Monitoring in NW Slay Case; Defendants Charged With Obstruction in Dupont Death”: Today’s edition of The Washington Post contains an article that begins, “Three men charged with obstruction of justice in connection with the death of a prominent lawyer in a Dupont Circle house have been released from electronic monitoring, but prosecutors said they expect to file additional charges against the men as early as next month.”

And “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” yesterday had a post titled “Price, Zaborsky, and Ward Removed From Supervision Program.”

“Child porn cartoon conviction upheld in Va.” The Associated Press provides this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued on Thursday.

My earlier coverage of the ruling appears at this link.

“Brown asks state high court to overturn Prop. 8”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update that begins, “State Attorney General Jerry Brown, in a surprise turnabout, asked the state Supreme Court late today to overturn Proposition 8, saying the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violates basic rights guaranteed in the state Constitution.”

The Los Angeles Times provides news updates headlined “Jerry Brown: Gay-marriage ban should be invalidated” and “Kenneth Starr to defend gay marriage ban before state Supreme Court.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Calif. AG urges court to void gay marriage ban.”

“Sitting on Great Judges: Where Obama should look when he makes his first appointments to the bench.” Emily Bazelon and Law Professor Judith Resnik have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

The Green Bag announces the honorees and nominees for Exemplary Legal Writing 2008: The publication issued this press release today. Of the sixteen pieces of legal writing that will be honored by inclusion in the Green Bag Almanac & Reader 2009, I voted for ten of them on my heretofore secret ballot.

Bad hair day but good O’Hare expansion day: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today issued an opinion that begins, “This case presents the question whether the Federal Labor Relations Authority reasonably concluded that customs officers endanger themselves by growing certain styles of hair, beards, and mustaches.”

Meanwhile, a separate ruling that the D.C. Circuit issued today begins, “This is the latest installment in an ongoing battle between the City of Chicago and the Federal Aviation Administration on the one hand, and various religious and secular communities bordering O’Hare International Airport on the other.”

“Perry endorses anti-abortion license plates; Governor’s efforts to back legislation highlight differences with possible foe Hutchison”: This article appears today in The Austin American-Statesman.

“The Real ‘Torture’ Disgrace: The left gears up to prosecute Bush officials for protecting the country.” The Wall Street Journal contains this editorial today.

“Minnesota Supreme Court: Count rejected absentee ballots ; The high court ordered Coleman and Franken to work with the Secretary of State and election officials to set up a process to identify ballots that were rejected in error.” This article appears today in The Minneapolis Star Tribune.

The St. Paul Pioneer Press reports today that “Tossed absentees added to count; But the state Supreme Court gives both campaigns veto power over each ballot.”

The New York Times reports that “Ruling Favors Democrat in Contest in Minnesota.”

And The Washington Post reports that “Holidays, Court Ruling Will Further Extend Minn. Senate Recount.”

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

“Nominee wrong for high court”: The St. Petersburg Times today contains an editorial that begins, “If Gov. Charlie Crist appoints Frank Jimenez to the Florida Supreme Court, he will be selecting the least qualified and most ideological nominee available.”

“Health providers’ ‘conscience’ rule to take effect; The last-minute Bush administration declaration lets doctors, clinics, receptionists and others refuse to give care they find morally objectionable”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And The Washington Post reports today that “Rule Shields Health Workers Who Withhold Care Based on Beliefs.”

“Plans Being Drawn to Close Guantanamo Prison”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

And Jonathan S. Landay and Margaret Talev of McClatchy Newspapers report that “Gates orders development of plans to close Guantanamo.”

“Next Release of Rehnquist Papers Delayed”: Tony Mauro has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“State Supreme Court to discipline judge for written opinion”: The St. Petersburg Times today contains an article that begins, “For the first time, the Florida Supreme Court will discipline a judge for something he wrote in a court opinion. The high court on Thursday ordered a public reprimand for Judge Michael E. Allen of the 1st District Court of Appeal, because he questioned the ethics of a fellow judge in a written opinion.”

And The Tallahassee Democrat reports today that “Judge Allen to face reprimand by Supreme Court; Rebuke marks end of conflict involving Judge Michael E. Allen.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Florida Supreme Court ruling appears at this link.

“Appellate court inherits debate about alienation-of-affection suits”: Today’s edition of The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contains an article that begins, “Should parents be allowed to sue their former spouses for turning their children against them? A judge in Morris County said no in August. But last month, a Hudson County judge ruled the opposite way, saying state law does not bar a parent from making a parental alienation claim in civil court. The two cases are now headed to appeals court, where they will be closely monitored by family-law attorneys who are split over the issue.”

“Supreme Judicial Court reprimands ex-judge Ernest B. Murphy; Court cites ‘misuse’ of power in letters to Herald publisher”: This article appears today in The Boston Herald.

And The Boston Globe reports today that “SJC reprimands judge for threat; Murphy insisted Herald pay him.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling appears at this link.

“Court Strikes Down Ban on Advertising Super Lawyer or Best Lawyer Status”: law.com has an article that begins, “Ending months of anticipation, New Jersey’s highest court has struck down as unconstitutional a prohibition on attorneys advertising their selections in Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America and other comparative ratings guides.”

My earlier coverage of Wednesday’s New Jersey Supreme Court ruling appears here and here.

“Citizenship in Israel At Center of Bail Fight”: Today in The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin has an article that begins, “The Justice Department is contending that a Jewish defendant in Iowa should be denied bail in part because he, like all Jews, is entitled to Israeli citizenship if he seeks to immigrate to the Jewish state. The argument against the defendant, Sholom Rubashkin, could in theory apply to all Jewish criminal suspects.”

“The Employee Free Choice Act Is Unconstitutional: Free speech and the takings clause are at stake.” Law Professor Richard A. Epstein has this op-ed today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Feds rights to baseball drug tests back in court”: The Associated Press provides this report about a case reargued today before an eleven-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Court reverses initiative petition ruling”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court Thursday ruled that an Oklahoma law that bars nonresidents from circulating initiative petitions in the state is unconstitutional and reversed a lower court that had upheld the statute.”

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

“Obscenity Conviction for Adult-to-Adult E-mail About Sex With Children”: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has this post about a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued today.

The October 9, 2006 installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com was headlined “Text This: Words Alone Can Violate Federal Obscenity Laws.”

“Bumbling Good Samaritans can be sued, state court rules”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update that begins, “A Good Samaritan whose well-meaning but careless rescue effort injures an accident victim can be sued for damages, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday. The court said California’s shield against liability for emergency help applies only to people trying to provide medical help.”

Carol J. Williams of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “California Supreme Court allows good Samaritans to be sued for nonmedical care; The ruling stems from a case in which a woman pulled a crash victim from a car ‘like a rag doll,’ allegedly aggravating a vertebrae injury.”

law.com reports that “Calif. Supreme Court Ruling May Deter Good Samaritans.”

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued.”

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

“Supreme Court sends Plan B case back to county”: The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois has a news update that begins, “Illinois Supreme Court justices, in a 5-2 decision issued this morning, sidestepped the issue of whether pharmacy owners have a state-granted ‘right of conscience’ to turn away customers seeking so-called ‘morning-after pills.'”

And The Associated Press reports that “‘Morning-after’ pill ruling allows debate to continue.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Illinois at this link.

“Supreme Court upholds Allen reprimand”: Paul Flemming of The Pensacola News Journal has an update that begins, “Judge Michael E. Allen will be publicly reprimanded for his scathing published opinion that said a fellow 1st District Court of Appeal Judge cast a corrupt vote in a case. The Florida Supreme Court today accepted the recommendations of a Judicial Qualifications Commission hearing panel that Allen face reprimand for the ethics violations brought against him.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Fla. appellate judge to get public reprimand.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Florida at this link.

“Judge who sued Herald reprimanded by SJC”: The Boston Globe has a news update that begins, “Superior Court Judge Ernest B. Murphy was publicly reprimand today by the state’s highest court for writing threatening letters to the publisher of the Boston Herald after winning a $2 million libel verdict against the newspaper.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Mass. court reprimands judge libeled by newspaper.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts at this link.