“Graham proposes framework for handling terrorism suspects”: This article appears today in The Washington Post, along with an article headlined “Chief lawyers named for Guantanamo Bay defense, prosecution teams.”

“Justices to Weigh Law on Gaining Citizenship via Parents”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

“Court hearing ‘Fatal Vision’ appeal after 40 years”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A former Army doctor convicted in the 1970 slayings of his pregnant wife and two daughters is asking a Virginia-based federal appeals court for a new trial. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond will hear arguments in 66-year-old Jeffrey MacDonald’s case Tuesday.”

“In Holder’s Woes, a Deja Vu ; Same Terror Issues Undermined the Career of Bush Attorney General Gonzales”: Evan Perez has this article today in The Wall Street Journal. You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

“Health-Overhaul Foes Ready Court Challenges”: In Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin will have an article that begins, “Opponents of the health-care overhaul awaiting President Barack Obama’s signature said Monday they would quickly file legal challenges, potentially giving the U.S. Supreme Court a fresh opportunity to reopen questions about the limits of federal power.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

“Gableman wants Crooks off of ethics case”: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a news update that begins, “State Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman, who has spent the last year fighting efforts to remove him from cases for bias, is now trying to force Justice N. Patrick Crooks from an ethics case against Gableman. Gableman filed a motion late Friday saying Crooks should step aside in the ethics case, contending Crooks showed bias against Gableman in a recent concurrence. Gableman accused Crooks in his motion of lodging ‘gratuitous personal attacks’ and ‘personal criticisms’ against him.”

“Trial in Same-Sex Marriage Case Is Challenged”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Court to weigh citizenship rule that varies by sex”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Supreme Court Battle Quietly Brews Over Possible Future Nominations; Contentious Hearing for Lower Court Nominee to Foreshadow High Court Battles to Come”: Ariane de Vogue has this article at ABCNews.com.

“Federal Circuit Confirms that Patents Must Meet Both the Written Description and Enablement Requirements of Section 112”: The blog “Patently-O” has this post about an en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

And, in a separate ruling issued today, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel divided 2-1 over the validity of a patent for “the idea of using a scratch-off label to mark beverage containers and cups so that attendees of a gathering or party could keep track of their beverage cups.”

“Court rules against Phila. Newspapers creditors”: The Philadelphia Inquirer has a news update that begins, “A federal appeals court has ruled that Philadelphia Newspapers L.L.C., the parent company of The Inquirer, the Daily News and Philly.com, can bar its senior lenders from using their debt to try to purchase the company at auction.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Philly newspaper creditors can’t bid with credit.”

The decision is not yet freely available from the web site of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Update: You can view today’s ruling, by a divided three-judge Third Circuit panel, at this link.

“We consider first to what extent the Federal Rules of Evidence apply in supervised release revocation proceedings. We then consider whether the use of an Internet search to confirm the judge’s intuition about a fact not subject to reasonable dispute is grounds for reversal.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this ruling today.

The federal district judge whose internet use was at issue has himself been nominated to serve on the Second Circuit.

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted it online at this link. The Court today granted review in four new cases.

Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a dissent from the denial of certiorari in Nurre v. Whitehead, No. 09-671.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Victory for U.S. on detainees.”

And in early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Justices to rule on $14M judgment vs. DA’s office“; “Court rejects new challenge from Gitmo detainees“; “Court refuses second Asian carp injunction request“; “High court stays out of Mass. abortion clinic case“; and “Court: Student can’t sue over ‘Ave Maria’ ban.”

“Death of source puts videotapes in jeopardy; Defendants could squelch tapes under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment”: Yesterday’s edition of The Salt Lake Tribune contained an article that begins, “The death of the government’s top witness in the Four Corners artifacts-trafficking investigation has forced prosecutors to re-evaluate how they will present thousands of hours of taped evidence he gathered during a two-year undercover operation.”

“Sizing up the Supreme Court after Justice John Paul Stevens retires; His expected exit shouldn’t alter the ideological balance, but his role as the senior justice on the liberal side has been pivotal”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Supreme Court to decide on the validity of prenuptial agreements”: The Times of London today contains an article that begins, “Britain’s most senior judges will hear a landmark appeal this week over whether divorcing couples should be bound by pre-marriage agreements on how their assets will be split.”

The Observer (UK)) reported yesterday that “Pre-nup agreements await ‘landmark judgment’; The Supreme Court is set to deliver a ruling that will have major consequences for many couples-to-be.”

And Financial Times reports today that “Heiress case puts pre-nup deals to the test.”

“U.S. may expand use of its prison in Afghanistan; The White House is considering housing international terrorism suspects at Bagram air base, as is done at Guantanamo Bay”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

And today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial entitled “Lindsey Graham’s Air Ball: The Senator offers Obama a Gitmo reprieve.”

“High Court: Law professor Goodwin Liu may be test case for Obama judicial picks.” Robert Barnes will have this article Monday in The Washington Post.

“Man appeals 2009 ruling against him in cold case”: Today’s edition of The Great Falls Tribune contains an article that begins, “A man who waited nearly a quarter century for a judge to rule on his lawsuit has now appealed a District Court’s 2009 ruling against him.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Shelby man appeals ruling in lawsuit misplaced by court for 24 years.”

“Courts in a quandary over cheap shots by anonymous bloggers”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains this article today.

“Judge appointments held hostage to politics”: This article appears today in The Providence (R.I.) Journal.

“It’s Not Me. It’s Yoo. The author of the ‘torture memos’ loves a good fight way more than a good debate.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Meanwhile, in other coverage, The Charlottesville Daily Progress reported yesterday that “After interruptions, Yoo defends harsh methods.”

And C-Ville reported late Friday that “John Yoo shouted down frequently at Miller Center forum, protested at UVA.”

“Rethinking Sex Offender Laws for Teenage Texting”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

“Even before House vote on healthcare bill, legal challenges loom; Opponents of the healthcare bill are poised to challenge it over the House’s likely use of the ‘deem and pass’ rule, as well as on the substance of the legislation itself”: Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

Today in The Wall Street Journal, law professor Michael W. McConnell has an op-ed entitled “The Health Vote and the Constitution–II: The House can’t approve the Senate bill in the same legislation by which it approves changes to the Senate bill.”

And in Sunday’s edition of The Washington Post, law professor Randy E. Barnett will have an op-ed entitled “Is health-care reform constitutional?”

“Ralph Fertig: Cog of justice; The longtime activist’s latest cause has brought him before the Supreme Court.” Patt Morrison has this interview today in The Los Angeles Times.

“White House Said to Have Short List Ready for Justice Stevens’ Slot”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

Estate of Anna Nicole Smith loses to the Estate of E. Pierce Marshall on the merits in the Ninth Circuit: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this ruling (very large PDF file) today.

Update: The Associated Press has an article headlined “Court: Anna Nicole Smith gets none of oil fortune.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Anna Nicole estate loses; Marshall family retains millions.”

Whether awake or asleep, felons shouldn’t possess guns, en banc Ninth Circuit rules: So holds a rare unanimous en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a ruling issued today.

As for why the case was taken en banc, the original three-judge panel had ruled by a 2-1 margin, in November 2008, that the defendant was entitled to a judgment of acquittal because he was found asleep but in possession of firearms.

My earlier coverage of the case appears in posts titled “Only in the Ninth Circuit?” (reporting on the original three-judge panel’s ruling) and “A real sleeper of a Ninth Circuit en banc case” (reporting on the order granting rehearing en banc).

“Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to Offer Remote Viewing of En Banc Hearings”: The Public Information Office of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this news release earlier this week.

Addressing a question of first impression at the appellate level, the Seventh Circuit holds that the use of video-conferencing to conduct a supervised-release revocation hearing violates the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link.

“Ex-dean to appeal verdict on affair”: The News & Record of Greensboro, North Carolina today contains an article that begins, “A woman facing a $9 million judgment for having an affair with a married man plans to appeal.”

“9th Circuit Judge Bucks Tide on Ashcroft’s Liability for Detention”: Dan Levine of The Recorder has this report.

“Virginia warns wife of Justice Clarence Thomas her group is violating law; State officials tell Virginia Thomas that her conservative advocacy group, Liberty Central Inc., must comply with a law that requires registration before seeking donations”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Deal Near on Gitmo, Trials for Detainees”: Jonathan Weisman and Evan Perez have this article today in The Wall Street Journal. You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

And in today’s edition of The Washington Post, columnist Michael Gerson has an op-ed entitled “Eric Holder, the attorney general of ineptness.” The newspaper also contains an op-ed by Benjamin Wittes and Jack L. Goldsmith entitled “The best trial option for KSM: Nothing.”

“Matheson on merits”: In today’s edition of The Salt Lake Tribune, former Tenth Circuit Judge Michael W. McConnell has a letter to the editor that begins, “News that University of Utah law professor Scott Matheson Jr. has been nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals has been marred by speculation that the nomination is an attempt to suborn the vote of his brother, Rep. Jim Matheson, in favor of the Obama administration’s health care proposal. From my personal knowledge, this speculation cannot be true.”