“‘Cipollone doctrine’ revived”: Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

En banc Ninth Circuit addresses claims of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea residents who allege that they or their family members were victims of numerous violations of international law resulting from Rio Tinto, PLC’s Bougainville mining operations: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

Way back in August 2006, a divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel issued this ruling in the case. The Ninth Circuit granted rehearing en banc on August 20, 2007, and the case was reargued en banc on October 11, 2007.

Out of the eleven-judge en banc panel, only three judges join in the opinion announcing the judgment of the court. But three other judges — at least one somewhat reluctantly — join in the lead opinion’s result, allowing the court to issue a judgment that speaks for a majority of the en banc panel. The order in which the opinions are organized is, as a result, unusual — after the lead opinion comes a concurring opinion, then a dissenting opinion, then a concurring opinion, and finally a dissent written by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt in which four judges have joined.

My earlier coverage of the three-judge panel’s ruling in the case can be accessed here and here. And the “Opinio Juris” blog analyzed the three-judge panel’s ruling in posts you can access here and here.

In Guantanamo-related news: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has articles headlined “Army colonel named chief judge at Guantanamo” and “Guantanamo captive asks Obama to close war court.”

And The New York Times reports today that “U.S. Is Set to Release 3 Detainees From Base.”

“In Blagojevich Case, Is It a Crime, or Just Talk?” The New York Times contains this news analysis today.

“Cheney was key in clearing CIA interrogation tactics; The vice president says that the use of waterboarding was appropriate and that the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should stay open until ‘the end of the war on terror'”: This article — based on an ABC News interview with Vice President Dick Cheney — appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Detainees’ Case Sent Back to Lower Court”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

And today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court revives lawsuit by former detainees; Four British Muslims who spent more than two years at Guantanamo want top Pentagon officials held responsible for their treatment.”

“Court Allows Suit Against ‘Light’ Cigarette Makers; Companies Face Huge Liabilities Over Marketing”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post. The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Clearing a Legal Haze: The Supreme Court stops Big Tobacco from blocking lawsuits over deceptive advertising.”

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court lets smokers sue over ‘light’ cigarettes; The justices rule that tobacco companies can be sued by smokers who claim they were deceived about health risks; The decision allows class-action suits to proceed in several states.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Court splits 5-4 on ‘light’ cigarettes; Case targets claims of deceptive marketing on labels, not health issues.”

In The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that “Altria Case Deals Blow to Efforts Reining In Lawsuits.”

And in commentary, The New York Times contains an editorial entitled “Big Loss for Big Tobacco.”

“Gitmo Lawyers Are the Latest in Radical Chic: How about some pro bono work for the government?” Today in The Wall Street Journal, columnist William McGurn has an op-ed that begins, “Within the ranks of our leading law schools, law firms and legal centers, it would be hard to find a cause more popular than the detainees of Guantanamo Bay. Every lawyer wants his own detainee or detainee group. The result is that dozens of the world’s most dangerous men now have their own legal Dream Teams.”

“Why Barack Obama, as President, Should Nominate Leading Law Professors for Seats on the Federal Appeals Court”: Law Professor Carl Tobias has this essay online at FindLaw.

“Despite Discipline Panel’s Harsh Words, Federal Judge Beats the Rap”: law.com provides a report that begins, “Judges on a federal discipline panel vindicated Judge Manuel Real on Friday, but they did it through clenched teeth. The Judicial Council of the 9th Circuit dismissed two misconduct complaints accusing Real of failing to state the reasons for his rulings.”

Posted online at the Ninth Circuit’s web site last Friday were a committee report dated September 23, 2008 and an order and memorandum dismissing the misconduct complaints.

Law Professor Eugene Volokh takes a look “Deep Inside the Second Circuit’s First Amendment ‘National Security Letter’ Opinion”: In this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Court upholds decision to keep Columbine depositions sealed”: Felisa Cardona of The Denver Post has a news update that begins, “The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld a decision to keep the depositions of the parents of Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold under seal for 20 years. Circuit judges Paul J. Kelly, Carlos F. Lucero and Harris L. Hartz issued the decision Monday, with Lucero writing a dissenting opinion.”

You can access today’s ruling by a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit at this link.

“Ex-Detainees Gain in Plea to Justices”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

Tuesday in The Christian Science Monitor, Warren Richey will have an article headlined “Supreme Court reinstates detainee suit against Rumsfeld, others; The move sets the stage for an appeals court to review the rights of Guantanamo prisoners.”

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court revives suit by 4 Guantanamo Bay ex-inmates; U.S. justices tell a federal appeals court to revisit the lawsuit; The British Muslim detainees say they seek to hold Pentagon officials responsible for their torture and abuse at the prison.”

“Light Cigarettes Makers May Be Sued, Court Rules”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

In Tuesday’s edition of The Christian Science Monitor, Warren Richey will have an article headlined “Supreme Court rules smokers can sue over ‘light’ cigarette claims; The decision will make it easier for local residents to recover damages from national firms, consumer groups say.”

Robert Barnes and Jerry Markon of The Washington Post have a news update headlined “Court Rules in Favor of Smokers Who Seek to Sue Big Tobacco.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “U.S. Supreme Court allows suits over ‘light’ cigarettes; Smokers say they were deceived into thinking ‘light’ and ‘low tar’ brands were safer; The justices’ action clears the way for class-action lawsuits, which could imperil tobacco companies.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Ruling hands big tobacco big setback on state suits.”

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court OKs Cigarette Lawsuits” (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg.

“Leahy Agrees to Postpone Holder Hearing by a Week”: This post appears this afternoon at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

In addition, this week’s print edition of Legal Times contains an article headlined “GOP Signals Rough Path to AG Position for Holder.”

Seventh Circuit reverses summary judgment in favor of Foley & Lardner in suit brought by former associate, a Muslim of Indian descent, who claims he was fired after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 because of his religion, race, national origin, and color: You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Hasan v. Foley & Lardner LLP at this link.

James Vicini of Reuters is reporting: He has articles headlined “Court rules against Altria on light cigarettes” and “Supreme Court orders review of Guantanamo torture case.”

“This appeal concerns challenges to the constitutionality of statutes regulating the issuance by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of a type of administrative subpoena generally known as a National Security Letter to electronic communication service providers”: So begins a lengthy opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“‘Light’ Cigarette Suits Allowed by U.S. Supreme Court”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

Access today’s opinion and Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: You can access today’s Order List at this link.

And in argued cases, the Court today issued its opinion in Altria Group, Inc. v. Good, No. 07-562. By a vote of 5-4, the Court has ruled that federal law does not preempt a lawsuit brought by smokers of “light” cigarettes alleging that defendants violated the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act by fraudulently advertising that the cigarettes delivered less tar and nicotine than regular brands. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion, in which Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer joined. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the dissenting opinion, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. This was the first case argued this Term — on the first Monday in October 2008 — and you can revisit the oral argument transcript by clicking here.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court orders new review on torture, allows tobacco lawsuits.” The “new review on torture” occurred by means of a GVR appearing on today’s Order List.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court allows lawsuits over ‘light’ cigarettes“; “Court revives case of former Gitmo detainees“; “Court sides with NY Times in anthrax libel case“; and “Court won’t review Obama’s eligibility to serve.”

“Nichols friend blames himself; ‘He has scars that run deep,’ childhood buddy says; ‘I know he’s remorseful’; Juror says 3 refused to agree to death penalty from start”: This article appears today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

And as I noted in this post from last night, yesterday’s newspaper contained numerous related articles.

“Prosecutor, DNA at odds; In 3 cases, Lake County prosecutor Michael Mermel is willing to pit other evidence against genetic tests that exclude defendants”: The Chicago Tribune contains this article today.

“A year later, state assesses justice without death penalty”: This article appears today in The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger.

“Familiar faces revolve through Supreme Court; Elite lawyers with ties to justices make multiple arguments”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

In today’s edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: The newspaper contains articles headlined “The Nichols Case — DA: Public denied ‘fair trial’; Doomed from start: Howard says holdouts never ‘entered into a meaningful discussion’ about death sentence“; “Bid to execute now up to feds“; “Failure to win death penalty resonates“; “Holdout jurors face pressure“; “A widow’s journey to justice“; “2 months of tests, then prison assignment“; and “Life in Supermax prison.”

“Report: Justice lawyer leaked surveillance program.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A former Justice Department lawyer says he tipped off the news media about the Bush administration’s warrantless eavesdropping program because it ‘didn’t smell right,’ Newsweek magazine reported Sunday.”

In the December 22, 2008 issue of Newsweek, Michael Isikoff has an article headlined “The Fed Who Blew the Whistle: Is he a hero or a criminal?” And Daniel Klaidman has an article headlined “Now We Know What the Battle Was About: Justice Department lawyers defied President Bush over secret surveillance–but not for the reasons you might think.”

“Putting the power back: With the case of Ali al-Marri, there’s renewed hope that the rule of law will be restored.” Law Professor Gene Nichol has this op-ed today in The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina.

“Court of the utmost import: As Judith Kaye must retire, a great jurist, regardless of gender, must be chosen as chief judge.” Law Professor Vincent Martin Bonventre has this op-ed today in Newsday.

“Supreme Court to Review if Consent Defense to Lewd Conduct on Minor”: Friday’s edition of the Metropolitan News-Enterprise contained an article that begins, “The California Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether consent is a defense to a charge of lewd conduct on a child under 14 by means of force or duress. Justices attending Wednesday’s conference in San Francisco voted unanimously to review the Sixth District Court of Appeal’s Sept. 9 ruling overturning a Santa Clara County man’s three convictions on the basis that the trial court deprived him of a valid defense when it instructed the jury that consent was not a defense.”

“Gov. Crist has chance to put stamp on state Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The South Florida Sun-Sentinel.

“Maneuvering to succeed state Supreme Court Chief Justice Frank J. Williams begins”: The Providence (R.I.) Journal contains this article today.

And Saturday’s newspaper contained an article headlined “Justice’s departure has many looking for the reason why.”

“Madigan launches legal attack to oust Blagojevich”: This article appears today in The Chicago Sun-Times.

Today’s edition of The Chicago Tribune contains an article headlined “Madigan: He’s unfit; Court request enters uncharted territory amid the tangled web of state politics.”

And The Wall Street Journal reports that “Official Aims to Strip Illinois Governor’s Powers.”

“Seattle’s parade law is unconstitutional”: The Seattle Times today contains an article that begins, “Seattle’s parade law is unconstitutional because it gives the police chief broad power to bar protesters from marching in the street, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Friday.”

And The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports today that “Court throws out city parade permit rules.”

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

“Rules will allow DNA samples from federal detainees; Currently, only those convicted of federal crimes can have DNA samples taken; Critics say the new rules, which take effect next month, would violate individual rights without solving more crimes”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Senate Republicans seek to delay hearings on Holder as attorney general; Obama’s Justice Department nominee was initially met with bipartisan praise; Now the GOP is raising concerns about pardons and more”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.