“Obama lawyers argue to drop Yoo torture suit”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update that begins, “President Obama’s Justice Department defended former Bush administration lawyer John Yoo in a San Francisco federal court Friday, arguing that a prisoner formerly held as an enemy combatant had no right to sue Yoo for writing legal memos that allegedly led to his detention and torture.”

“Justices Limit Authority of President on Detainees”: Adam Liptak will have this article Saturday in The New York Times.

And in Saturday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes and Carrie Johnson will have an article headlined “Court Puts Off Decision On Indefinite Detention; Justices: Indictment Made Issue Moot.”

“Court Upholds Most Charges Against Ex-Governor”: This article will appear Saturday in The New York Times.

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

“Ban on medical pot cases quickly lifted; L.A.’s U.S. attorney declines to say why he ordered prosecutors to stop filing charges, then abruptly changed his mind”: Scott Glover will have this article Saturday in The Los Angeles Times.

Joseph P. Nacchio previews his forthcoming petition for writ of certiorari in an application for bail filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: The Tenth Circuit has posted the application for release at this link.

In news coverage, Reuters reports that “Nacchio requests bail pending Supreme Court review.”

The Denver Business Journal reports that “Nacchio asks for new trial, plans U.S. Supreme Court appeal.”

And The Pottsville (Pa.) Republican and Herald reports today that “Ex-Qwest executive to serve sentence in Minersville.”

“Court nixes lawsuit against Florida judge rules”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court has decided against a Florida group seeking to nullify a rule that prevented many judicial candidates from answering survey questions on issues such as abortion, school vouchers and gay marriage.”

Circuit Judge Ed Carnes wrote today’s ruling for a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

At pages 16 through 19 of the slip opinion, the court discusses whether a judge or judicial candidate who, as a result of answering the organization’s questionnaire, would likely be forced to disqualify or recuse himself from deciding certain hot button issues has suffered injury for purposes of standing to sue.

“Palin pick to be Alaska’s 2nd female on high court”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has appointed a state judge who once served on the board of Planned Parenthood to the state Supreme Court, against the urgings of a conservative group who claimed the pick would put ‘another activist’ on the court.”

“Obama, Bush Secret-Keeper: What’s the president’s rationale for keeping so many legal skeletons in the closet?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

In coverage of today’s rulings of note from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “New lift for detainee challenges.” You can access the ruling at this link.

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella has posts titled “Court: D.C. Firefighters, Paramedics Can Keep Whiskers” (ruling here) and “Jeff Taylor: O for 1 in the D.C. Circuit” (ruling here).

“3L Makes ‘Superb’ First Impression in the D.C. Circuit”: Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Journalists warily eye Massachusetts libel ruling”: The Associated Press has this report.

“State high court denies Franken bid for election certificate; The Democrat had sought to be seated in the U.S. Senate provisionally while Republican Norm Coleman’s lawsuit plays out; Meanwhile, Franken also is pressing to have that suit dismissed”: The Minneapolis Star Tribune has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Court rejects Franken’s bid to be seated in Senate.”

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

“Thoughts of Storm Troopers Filling Spy Case”: This afternoon at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post that begins, “Legal scholars, the blogopshere and the twitterati have been scratching their heads for a week following the Obama administration’s assertion that it might ‘withdraw’ classified documents at the center of a closely watched spy case.”

“Layoffs at the Volokh Conspiracy”: Orin Kerr has this post.

Meanwhile, readers of “How Appealing” may have noted that having too much billable work for appellate clients resulted in no new posts appearing at this blog between 2:50 p.m. on Wednesday, March 4, 2009 and 11:20 a.m. on Thursday, March 5, 2009. For the record, slightly more than three hours of sleep were also enjoyed during that period.

“Court upholds most charges against ex-Ala. gov”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Friday upheld most of the bribery and corruption charges against former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and all of the charges against former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy.”

And The Birmingham News has an update headlined “Lawyer: Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman disappointed but upbeat after appeals court rules.”

You can access today’s 68-page, per curiam ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.

“Court Vacates Ruling on Indefinite Detention of Legal Residents; Justices Decline to Take Up Case of Suspected al-Qaeda Agent”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. High Court Drops ‘Enemy Combatant’ Fight, Dismisses Appeal.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “US justices dismiss accused al Qaeda agent’s case.”

At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Supreme Court Orders Dismissal of al-Marri Case.”

You can access today’s order of the Supreme Court of the United States at this link.

“Al-Marri detention case ended”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

And Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Court ends terror suspect’s detention challenge.”

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit demotes Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner to “District Judge” status: See this non-precedential decision (at page two) that the Federal Circuit issued today. In the Federal Circuit’s defense, surely Judge Posner has been called worse things than “District Judge,” notwithstanding how greatly he is revered here at “How Appealing.”

Thanks much to the reader (no, it wasn’t Judge Posner himself) who kindly drew this to my attention moments ago.

“Better Legal Treatment Mandated for Lawyer Defendants Than for Others?” Eugene Volokh has this post this morning at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about a recent Eleventh Circuit ruling that I’ve noted here and here.

“Nominee for Solicitor General Revises Her Opinion on Opinions”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

“Although the Ohio Constitution provides a general right to bear arms, the state certainly does not have a ‘clear public policy’ of allowing employees to possess firearms on the premises of their private employers.” A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit today issued this opinion rejecting a former UPS employee’s claim that he was wrongfully discharged “in violation of the public policy embodied in Article I, sec. 4 of the Ohio Constitution, which guarantees Ohio citizens the right to bear arms for their defense and security.”

According to today’s opinion, “In accordance with written company policy, UPS prohibits its employees from possessing firearms while on its property.”

What’s going on? Yesterday, I filed this Brief for Appellants in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in fourteen consolidated appeals that have previously received some press coverage. See “Judge Asks Pa. Appeals Court to Uphold Dismissal of Consolidated HRT Cases“; “Pa. Judge Denies Another Breast Cancer-HRT Claim“; and “HRT Patient’s Personal Injury Claim Found to Be Time-Barred” (all freely available via law.com).

One week from today, on the afternoon of Friday the 13th, I’ll be in New Orleans to participate as a speaker at a Loyola Law Review symposium titled “On the Brink: The Judiciary’s Tug of War with Technology.” The visit will mark this Cajun food fan’s first ever visit to New Orleans. Readers who have suggestions for great places to visit — other than the nearby Bashman Bayou, which of course is already on my list — and great places to eat in New Orleans are invited to forward those suggestions via email.

On Tuesday, March 17, 2009, I’ll be arguing another appeal before a three-judge Pa. Superior Court panel in a criminal case where my client is raising a Confrontation Clause challenge to his conviction. I’ll try to post those briefs here in advance of that oral argument.

And on Thursday, June 11, 2009, I’ll be speaking at the 2009 Kentucky Bar Association Annual Convention in Covington, Kentucky about the U.S. Supreme Court‘s current Term. This will be my first time back in the Cincinnati region since September 2006, when I argued this case before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

In commentary available online from FindLaw: Marci A. Hamilton has an essay entitled “Pleasant Grove City v. Summum: The Supreme Court’s Puzzling, Fascinating New Establishment Clause Decision.”

Julie Hilden has an essay entitled “The Defamation Lawsuit Against One of the ‘Freakonomics’ Authors: Analyzing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s Decision.”

And Joanna Grossman has an essay entitled “Sex-Stereotyping and Dress Codes Under Title VII: Why Courts Can’t Get it Right.”

“Ruling could spur tougher drug warnings; Mass. firms’ plans unclear”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe, along with an editorial entitled “The court rules for patients.”

And today’s edition of USA Today contains an editorial entitled “Injured consumers win much-needed day in court; Allow lawsuits, but make plaintiffs prove deception or negligence.” In response, Bert Rein has an op-ed entitled “Tragic injury makes bad law; Let experts, not juries, determine medical products’ risks and benefits.”

“Ginsburg back with grit, grace; Interview: Goals keep her focused in cancer battle.” Joan Biskupic has this front page article today in USA Today.

“Dems move to overturn shield for device makers”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A day after the Supreme Court decided that federal rules do not protect drugmakers from state lawsuits, Democrats in Congress moved to overturn a decision that has shielded medical device companies from similar legal action.”

Reuters reports that “Democrats seek to reverse device court ruling.”

And Dow Jones Newswires report that “Democrats Propose Bill To Reverse Key Medical Device Ruling.”

“US cites Boston psychiatrist in case vs. drug firm; Complaint alleges kickbacks to MDs”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

“Live coverage boosts access to federal courtrooms”: The Associated Press has this report.