How Appealing



Tuesday, April 20, 2010

“AP source: Obama talking to possible court picks.” The Associated Press has this report.

Bill Mears of CNN.com has a report headlined “Source: Obama having informal talks with Supreme Court candidates.”

Reuters reports that “Obama starts talks with possible high court picks.”

And Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain an article headlined “Obama Begins Court Interviews.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

Posted at 10:17 PM by Howard Bashman



“Justices Void Law Banning Videos of Animal Cruelty”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court voids law aimed at banning animal cruelty videos.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Justices cite free speech in striking down animal-cruelty law; The Supreme Court overturns a law that makes it illegal to sell depictions of animal cruelty; The ruling is a setback for the animal-rights movement.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Supreme Court Strikes Down Prohibition on Depictions of Animal Cruelty.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court strikes down animal cruelty law.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Animal ‘Crush Video’ Law Voided by U.S. Supreme Court.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “First Amendment left intact; Animal cruelty videos escape ban.”

Posted at 2:08 PM by Howard Bashman



“Justices Get Personal Over Privacy of Messages”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “High court reviews privacy of texts on company gear.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Justices hear case of Ontario police officer who sent risque messages; The Supreme Court considers the issue of workplace e-mails and cellphone calls in the case of an officer whose explicit texts were read by his boss.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court takes up ‘sexting’ privacy case; The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in the case of a California police officer who sued when records from his department-issued pager were submitted to internal affairs; He had used the pager for sending sexually explicit text messages, or ‘sexting.’

The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, California reports that “U.S. Supreme Court begins hearing Ontario v. Quon, an Inland text privacy case.”

And Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal reports that “High Court Justices Consider Privacy Issues in Text Messaging Case.”

Posted at 10:18 AM by Howard Bashman



Access online today’s ruling(s) of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The first and only decision announced today is United States v. Stevens, No. 08-769. You can access the Court’s ruling at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link. The Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion. The vote to affirm the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit‘s ruling is 8-1.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court voids law aimed at animal cruelty videos.”

Posted at 10:05 AM by Howard Bashman



“Supreme Court considers California law school’s discrimination policy”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

Today in The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that “Justices Joust Over Christian Group’s Rights; Dispute Centers on Whether Student Club Can Receive State Funding After Excluding Members Due to Their Beliefs.” In addition, columnist William McGurn has an op-ed entitled “Sameness and ‘Diversity’ on Campus: Why a California dean would force a black group to admit white supremacists.” You can freely access the full text of the op-ed via Google News.

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Justices split sharply on school’s bias policy; Student group wants right to exclude gays.”

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Hastings defends anti-bias policy at high court.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court appears to back student group’s exclusionary rules.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court sharply divided on Christian student group case; The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in the case of a Christian student group that required members to denounce homosexuality; The court appeared split.”

The Washington Times reports that “Justices weigh case of clash of beliefs; It’s Christians vs. gays, atheists on freedom of association.”

Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal reports that “Supreme Court Arguments Turn Heated in Case Over Christian Law Student Group.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court weighs case of Christian group that bars gays.”

And on yesterday evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “Court Weighs Rights Of Campus Religious Groups.”

Posted at 9:50 AM by Howard Bashman



“3rd Circuit Urged to Revive Class Action Requiring Cell Phone Headsets”: Shannon P. Duffy has this article today in The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

Posted at 9:12 AM by Howard Bashman