“AP Source: Gitmo 9/11 suspects to NY for trial.” The Associated Press has this report.

“White House counsel poised to give up post; Tenure marked by struggles over closing Guantanamo”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “White House Counsel Gregory B. Craig is expected to announce his departure as early as Friday, people familiar with the situation said, ending an embattled tenure in which he struggled to lead the closure of the U.S. military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.”

And The Associated Press has a report headlined “Official: Craig to step down as White House lawyer.”

“Philip Berg, a lawyer acting pro se, filed this action challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to run for and serve as President of the United States.” So begins a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued today.

And today’s opinion concludes, “Because there is no case or controversy, we will affirm
the District Court’s order dismissing Berg’s action.”

“U.S. ex-spy Plame and publisher lose memoir appeal”: Reuters has this report.

The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: CIA Didn’t Violate Plame’s Rights; N.Y. Court Upholds 2007 Decision that Barred Former CIA Operative from Revealing Length of her Tenure with Agency.”

Chad Bray of Dow Jones Newswires has a report headlined “Appeals Court: CIA Didn’t Violate Ex-Agent’s Free Speech Rights.”

The New York Law Journal reports that “Circuit Upholds Ban on Disclosure of Details About Former Spy’s Service.”

And at “The Am Law Daily” blog, Zach Lowe has a post titled “Weil Can’t Help Plame Un-Redact Book.”

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

On losing your sex appeal: BBC News has a report headlined “Noisy sex woman loses appeal bid,” along with an earlier report headlined “Court hears couple’s sex sessions.”

In today’s edition of The Daily Mail (UK), columnist Craig Brown has an essay entitled “Silence in court! This case is a real scream…”

Yesterday’s edition of The Daily Mirror (UK) contained an article headlined “Noisy sex ‘scary as murder.’”

And earlier this week, The Telegraph (UK) reported that “Woman claims order banning her from noisy sex is breach of human rights.”

“Nominations Talk Opens Federalist Convention”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post that begins, “The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee launched the Federalist Society’s annual convention this morning with a call to oppose President Barack Obama’s most liberal nominees for the federal bench.”

Second Circuit holds that the CIA did not violate the First Amendment when it refused to allow Valerie Plame Wilson to publish information regarding her possible pre-2002 service with the Agency, notwithstanding the prior public disclosure of that information: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

Oh, bother: The Associated Press reports that “Winnie the Pooh royalties dispute appealed.”

“Monroe honking case makes it to state Supreme Court; The argument over a woman’s use of her horn in Monroe goes to the state Supreme Court”: Yesterday’s edition of The Daily Herald of Everett, Washington contained an article that begins, “A former Monroe woman once jailed over honking her horn during a neighborhood squabble over chickens is taking her fight against Snohomish County’s noise rules to the state Supreme Court.”

“Ricci‘s Back In Court”: The New Haven Independent has an article that begins, “Four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of 20 New Haven firefighters, the controversial case has landed back in a local courthouse, where a jury trial looms.”

“John O’Connor dies at age 79; Justice’s spouse was expert lawyer”: This obituary appears today in The Arizona Republic.

Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an obituary headlined “John J. O’Connor III, Husband of Former Justice, Is Dead at 79.”

The Washington Post contains an obituary headlined “John J. O’Connor III: Ariz. lawyer, husband of pioneering jurist.”

And The Los Angeles Times contains an obituary headlined “John J. O’Connor III dies at 79; attorney and husband of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor; In a groundbreaking role reversal, he gave up his partnership at a venerable Phoenix law firm to accompany her to Washington when she became the court’s first female member in 1981.”

“Law Students See Their Work in Action at Supreme Court”: law.com has this report.

“Panel debates media, U.S. Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The Daily Princetonian.

“New Lawsuits Try to Pierce Shield of Judicial Immunity”: Ashby Jones has this article today in The Wall Street Journal. You can access the full text of the article via Google News.

“Her Honor: A Portrait of Justice Sonia Sotomayor.” Latina magazine has posted online this lengthy excerpt of the cover story from its December/January issue.

“Showdown on Judicial Nominee Set for Next Week”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post that begins, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is following through on a plan to cut off debate on President Barack Obama’s most contentious circuit court nominee so far.”

And today’s edition of Investor’s Business Daily contains a related editorial entitled “Another Radical Judge.”

“Lawyer Learns that Roberts Speaks Only for Himself”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“‘I Believe’ tag fails test in court; Judge says S.C. religious plate based on discriminatory law”: Today’s edition of The Post and Courier of Charleston, South Carolina contains an article that begins, “A federal district court ruled Tuesday that the ‘I Believe’ license plate approved by the S.C. Legislature violates the constitutional separation of church and state and cannot be issued.” The newspaper has posted online this photograph of the rejected license plate.

The State of Columbia, South Carolina reports today that “Judge strikes down plate; Words on Christian cross ruled unconstitutional by federal jurist who says it promotes one religion over another.”

The Greenville News reports that “Legislation creating ‘I Believe’ license plans unconstitutional, judge rules.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal judge nixes SC license tag with cross.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina at this link.

“Class Actions Look for a Home”: Today in The Daily Journal of California, Lawrence Hurley has an article that begins, “In a major class action case, the U.S. Supreme Court looks likely to reverse a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that makes it easier to sue big companies in plaintiff-friendly California state courts.”

And Dow Jones Newswires report that “US Supreme Court Appears Set To Change Corporate Location Test.”

“Justice O’Connor’s Husband Dead at 79”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Husband of retired Justice O’Connor dies.”

How much is a volume of the Georgetown Law Journal worth to you? To Texas prison inmate, it was worth strike three under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued this ruling yesterday.

“While the issue is difficult and close, we believe that the rule against juror impeachment cannot be applied so inflexibly as to bar juror testimony in those rare and grave cases where claims of racial or ethnic bias during jury deliberations implicate a defendant’s right to due process and an impartial jury.” An email from a juror to the attorney for a criminal defendant in a case tried in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire resulted in this rather interesting ruling yesterday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

“Court ruling issued on Eagle Mountain landfill”: The “Daily News Digest” blog of The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, California has a post that begins, “A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling [yesterday] on the proposed Eagle Mountain landfill near Joshua Tree National Park.”

At the recently restarted blog “How Green Is My Country,” Sarah Rispin has a post titled “Ninth Circuit Affirms Reversal of BLM Decision Allowing Landfill Next to Joshua Tree.”

At the “Native Intelligence” blog of LAObserved, Deanne Stillman has this post about the ruling.

And Kaiser Ventures has issued a news release titled “U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Announces Its Decision on the Eagle Mountain Land Exchange.”

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

Senior Circuit Judge Stephen S. Trott‘s dissenting opinion begins:

What sane person would want to attempt to acquire property for a landfill? Our well-meaning environmental laws have unintentionally made such an endeavor a fool’s errand. This case is yet another example of how daunting — if not impossible — such an adventure can be. Ulysses thought he encountered fearsome obstacles as he headed home to Ithaca on the Argo, but nothing that compares to the “due process” of unchecked environmental law. Not the Cyclops, not the Sirens, and not even Scylla and Charybdis can measure up to the obstacles Kaiser has faced in this endeavor.

The dissenting opinion begins on page 33 of yesterday’s ruling.

“From Justice Kennedy, a Lesson in Journalism”: Adam Liptak has this interesting front page article today in The New York Times.

“Pfizer and Kelo’s Ghost Town: Pfizer bugs out, long after the land grab.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

Related news coverage can be accessed here from The Hartford Courant and here, here, here, here, and here from The Day of New London, Connecticut.

“Justices Sympathetic to Applying Headquarters Standard to Corporate Jurisdiction”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

You can access at this link the transcript of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, No. 08-1107.

“Yoo’s lawyers warn of flood of political suits”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

And The Associated Press reports that “Former Bush aide seeks to toss torture memos suit.”

As noted in this post from yesterday morning, I have posted the appellate brief at this link.

“Muhammad executed for sniper killing; 10 died in Oct. 2002 rampage; what motivated two shooters remains unclear”: Wednesday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain this article, along with an essay by Paul Duggan entitled “Sniper’s imprint, faded, remains perceptible.”

Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an article headlined “Sniper Who Killed 10 Is Executed in Virginia.”

And The Baltimore Sun has a news update headlined “D.C.-area sniper Muhammad executed; Makes no last statement; Va. governor denies convicted sniper’s clemency request.”

“Divorce may mean retiring is delayed; Court says alimony might force some to work more years”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

The New York Times reports today that “Retirees Still Liable for Alimony, Massachusetts Court Rules.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Mass. high court says alimony can continue after retirement.”

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

“DC sniper execution: why his case moved so quickly; For John Allen Muhammad, the convicted DC sniper, execution is scheduled for Tuesday night. He was tried in Virginia, which is known for hearing appeals rapidly.” The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

And today’s edition of The Washington Post contains a front page article headlined “Detecting glimpses of humanity in D.C. sniper.” The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Vengeance is not thine: Witnessing an execution doesn’t always bring closure for the victims’ survivors.”

“Eight Missouri death-row inmates lose legal appeal”: The Kansas City Star has a news update that begins, “A group of Missouri death row inmates on Tuesday lost an appeal that had temporarily halted executions in the state.”

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has a news update headlined “Appeals court rejects MO death row inmates’ appeal.”

And The Associated Press provides this coverage.

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

“Sotomayor poses in court for Latina magazine cover”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Appeals court agrees Vick can keep $16M in bonuses”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court is backing the judge who ruled against the NFL and let quarterback Michael Vick keep more than $16 million in roster bonuses from the Atlanta Falcons.”

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

“From 19th-Century View, Desegregation Is a Test”: In The New York Times, today’s installment of Adam Liptak’s “Sidebar” column begins, “If there is a topic Justice Antonin Scalia does not relish discussing, it is how he would have voted in Brown v. Board of Education had he been on the Supreme Court when it was decided in 1954.”

Law professor John Yoo files Brief for Appellant in Ninth Circuit appeal challenging federal district court’s decision that he may be sued by Jose Padilla, who says he was tortured while being held for nearly four years as a suspected terrorist: I have posted online at this link the Brief for Appellant filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case captioned Jose Padilla v. John Yoo. Miguel A. Estrada is lead counsel for Yoo on appeal.

My earlier coverage of the federal district court’s decision that is the subject of the appeal can be accessed here.