“Defending due process for Guantanamo detainees; Defense attorneys for Guantanamo detainees stand up for due process despite hate mail, threats, and Dick Cheney’s daughter”: The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“Supreme Court may weigh coverage mandate; Health care reform now in court’s hands”: This article appears today in The Washington Times.

And Alexander Bolton of The Hill reports that “GOP views Supreme Court as last line of defense on health reform.”

“Obama nominates Arizona judge to 9th Circuit Appeals Court; Mary Murguia, a Kansas native and twin of Janet Murguia, head of the National Council of La Raza, has served for 10 years on the federal district bench in Arizona”: Carol J. Williams had this article Saturday in The Los Angeles Times.

“US Supreme Court ruling on ‘cubed case’ could scare off foreign companies”: This article appears today in The Times of London.

And Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal reports that “Justices to Consider a Border Battle Over Lawsuits; High court case challenges use of American courts by foreign plaintiffs.”

“In Berkeley, Yoo feels at home as a stranger in a strange land; The Bush administration lawyer who gave legal cover to enhanced interrogation methods says he’s happy teaching at Boalt Hall School of Law, despite calls for his ouster and protests by liberal groups”: Carol J. Williams has this front page article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Democrats Defend Appointments”: Monday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an article that begins, “A leading Republican predicted Sunday that President Obama’s appointment of 15 officials while sidestepping Senate confirmation would make it more difficult to get bipartisan support for future legislation.”

“Obama Team Is Divided on Tactics Against Terrorism”: Charlie Savage will have this article Monday in The New York Times.

And at Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has an article headlined “No good options for President Obama in Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial.”

“Chief justice’s defeat in ’86 marked turning point; Contest altered complexion of judicial races; result set stage for GOP dominance on bench”: Jim Provance has this article today in The Toledo Blade.

“Time nearly up on malpractice suit against missing doctor; Family’s case against doctor who could not be found by legal deadline has gone to Texas Supreme Court”: Chuck Lindell has this interesting article today in The Austin American-Statesman.

“The ‘individual mandate’ an intrusion on civil society”: Law professor John Yoo has this op-ed today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“McDonald’s and strip-search victim settle lawsuit”: Yesterday’s edition of The Louisville Courier-Journal contained an article that begins, “With both sides unwilling to take their chances on an appeal, McDonald’s and strip-search victim Louise Ogborn have settled the lawsuit in which a jury awarded her $6.1 million.”

This blog’s earlier coverage of the case can be accessed here.

“Cocaine sentencing inequity goes to top court; Supreme Court will hear Percy Dillon’s plea for a substantial sentence reduction”: In today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Paula Reed Ward has this article about a case that is scheduled to be argued on Tuesday before the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Courts Take On Campaign Finance Decision”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Rulings split on campaign fundraising; A three-judge panel rejects a GOP challenge to limits on direct contributions to candidates or political parties; A D.C. appeals court rules that independent groups may spend as much as they wish.”

And The Washington Post reports that “Ruling allows contributions to activist groups for campaigns.”

“An Exceptional Nominee”: Sunday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an editorial that begins, “The first major appeals-court nomination fight of the Obama presidency may be shaping up over Goodwin Liu, a highly qualified teacher and legal scholar.”

“After a Supreme Court Loss, Washington’s Gun Laws Pass Muster”: John Schwartz has this article today in The New York Times.

And today’s edition of The Washington Post contains an article headlined “Federal judge upholds D.C. gun regulations; appeal expected.”

“Ruling on drug cases may spur appeals; Hundreds could seek new trial, early release”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “Hundreds of drug cases could be appealed and some convicted drug dealers could win early release because of a ruling by the state’s highest court yesterday that retroactively applies a new constitutional principle to drug trials held from 2005 to 2009, lawyers said. In a closely-watched, 6-to-1 decision, the Supreme Judicial Court moved to clear up confusion created last year when the US Supreme Court ruled that Massachusetts routinely violated the rights of defendants in drug trials by not having a chemist testify in person that a seized substance was in fact an illegal drug.”

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

“Obama makes 15 recess appointments, scolds GOP”: The Associated Press has this report.

And The White House today issued a news release headlined “President Obama Announces Recess Appointments to Key Administration Positions; Fifteen Appointees Have Waited an Average of 214 Days for Senate Confirmation.”

“States fighting healthcare law don’t have precedent on their side; A 2005 Supreme Court ruling citing the authority to regulate commerce poses a problem for suits claiming it’s unconstitutional for the federal government to force individuals to have insurance”: David G. Savage has this front page article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Appeals court upholds removal of Confederate plaques; Since-repealed provision dedicated state Supreme Court Building to Confederate veterans when it was built”: The Austin American-Statesman today contains an article that begins, “An Austin appellate court on Friday upheld the removal a decade ago of two politically charged plaques at the state Supreme Court building bearing the Confederate battle flag and seal.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Third Court of Appeals of Texas at this link.

“Republicans Dispute Charges of Stalling on Judicial Nominees”: FOXNews.com has this report.

And at Salon.com, Glenn Greenwald has a blog post titled “The horrible prospect of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein.”

“Court tells poker players to fold ’em; State appeals panel overturns area judge’s ruling legalizing popular card game”: Today’s edition of The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania contains an article that begins, “For fans of Texas Hold ‘Em Poker it’s a case of read ’em and weep. In potentially precedent-setting ruling, a three-member panel of state Superior Court on Thursday overturned a county judge’s ruling that had declared the popular card game to be legal.”

You can access Thursday’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

I had this post linking to various of the appellate briefs and the trial court’s opinion back in October 2009 on the day that I argued the appeal.

“Court: Seattle police OK to Taser pregnant woman.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court says three Seattle police officers were justified when they used a stun gun on a pregnant mother who refused to sign a traffic ticket.”

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

“Arizona Federal Judge Mary H. Murguia Nominated to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals”: The Public Information Office of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this news release today.

“Which Side of History?” Linda Greenhouse has this post at the “Opinionator” blog of The New York Times.

“Court strikes limits on contributions to independent political groups”: Dan Eggen of The Washington Post has this news update.

The Associated Press reports that “RNC loses bid to raise unlimited ‘soft’ money.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has posts titled “Widening impact of Citizens United; Circuit nullifies donor limit” and “‘Soft money’ donation ban upheld; Broad GOP challenge rejected.”

And “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” has posts titled “D.C. Circuit Strikes Down Limits on Donations to Independent Political Groups” and “Citing Precedent, Panel Upholds Soft-Money Ban.”

The decisions being reported on consist of an en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the ruling of a three-judge court of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“District’s Post-Heller Firearm Restrictions Are Upheld”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post that begins, “Judge Ricardo Urbina of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has just ruled that the D.C. firearm ordinances enacted after the Supreme Court’s D.C. v. Heller decision in 2008 ‘permissibly regulate the exercise of the core Second Amendment right to use firearms for the purpose of self-defense in the home.’ Urbina ruled in a case brought by Dick Heller, the same plaintiff who challenged the previous D.C. ordinance at the Supreme Court.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy’s Washington Bureau has a post titled “Heller shot down, judicially speaking, as court upholds D.C. gun regs” at his “Suits & Sentences” blog.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “New D.C. gun laws upheld; Sequel to 2008 ruling.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Judge upholds DC’s post-Supreme Court gun laws.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“Appeals court scolds Wingate; Judge accepts blame for verdict held 6-plus years”: Yesterday’s edition of The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contained an article that begins, “Chief U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate has been criticized by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after taking more than six years to enter a final judgment in a civil case.”

Footnote two on page three of this non-precedential Fifth Circuit ruling from last week gives rise to The Clarion-Ledger’s report.

“She’s 1-for-2 in sex-for-tix case; Not guilty of prostitution, guilty of attempted prostitution”: The Philadelphia Daily News today contains an article that begins, “Susan Finkelstein, whose 15 minutes of fame has finally come to an end after months of notoriety, was found not guilty yesterday of prostitution, but guilty of attempted prostitution by a Bucks County jury in her sex-for-World-Series-tickets trial.”

And today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an article headlined “Mixed verdict in tickets-for-sex trial.”

“After victory, conservatives mount new challenges to campaign finance limits”: Today’s edition of The Washington Post contains an article that begins, “In a small office overlooking Indiana’s Highway 40, James Bopp Jr. is preparing a nationwide assault on campaign finance regulations.”

“Former DOJ Official Picked for 9th Circuit”: David Ingram has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Arizona judge nominated for appeals court.”

You can access the official Federal Judicial Center biography for U.S. District Judge Mary H. Murguia (D. Ariz.) at this link.

“New war-court chief may mean more tribunals at Guantanamo”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this report.

Articles of interest available online at SSRN: Law professor Bradley W. Joondeph has a paper titled “The Political Dimensions of Federal Preemption in the United States Courts of Appeals” (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

And Shaun M. Pettigrew and law professor David R. Stras have an essay titled “The Rising Caseload in the Fourth Circuit: A Statistical and Institutional Analysis” (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

“State High Court weighs strip club ‘pole tax'”: This article appears today in The San Antonio Express-News.

Today in The Austin American-Statesman, Chuck Lindell reports that “Texas Supreme Court tackles tax on strip clubs; Owners say fee violates free speech; officials say it aids public safety.”

And The Wall Street Journal reports that “‘Sin Tax’ Called Naked Money Grab.” You can access the full text of this article via Google News.

Via this post from yesterday evening, you can access the video of the oral argument.

“L.A. can bar Hare Krishnas from panhandling at airports, court rules; The California Supreme Court rules bans on solicitations do not violate state constitutional guarantees of free speech; The ruling covers all cities and counties in the state”: Maura Dolan and Dan Weikel have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Airport money-raising ban ruled constitutional.”

And The Daily Breeze of Torrance, California reports that “Court rules in favor of LAX regulating Hare Krishna solicitors.”

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

And a related YouTube clip can be accessed here.

“Foreign Companies Fight ‘Class-Action Mills’ at Top U.S. Court”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.