“Justices weigh election arguments”: Friday’s edition of The Pacific Daily News of Guam contains an article that begins, “The Supreme Court of Guam decided last night to hear arguments in an election challenge filed by the defeated gubernatorial campaign team before the inauguration of the governor-elect.”

“Vander Plaats compares Iowa justices to teens who flee a beer party”: The Des Moines Register has this blog post today.

“Behind-the-scenes tour reveals Supreme Court traditions, grandeur”: Bill Mears of CNN.com has this report.

Josh Gerstein is reporting: At Politico.com, he has an article headlined “Barack Obama’s plan to close Gitmo ‘in shambles.’”

And at his “Under the Radar” blog, he has a post titled “Obama administration readies first execution.”

“Cheerleader taking free-speech suit to high court”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

Fifth Circuit grants rehearing en banc in case raising the issue whether the law is clearly established that the First Amendment prohibits religious viewpoint discrimination at the elementary school level: The lawsuit arises from the decision of the Plano (Tex.) Independent School District to prohibit Michaela Wade from distributing to her elementary school classmates at the annual “winter break” party pencils bearing the inscription “Jesus is the Reason for the Season.”

A unanimous three-judge panel ruled — first in late June 2010 and then by means of an amended opinion reaching the same result issued late last month — that “it has been clear for over half a century that the First Amendment protects elementary school students from religious-viewpoint discrimination,” and thus school officials were not entitled to qualified immunity.

By means of an order issued last Friday (which the Fifth Circuit posted online yesterday), the Fifth Circuit has granted rehearing en banc in the case, so stay tuned! The case may put some of the Fifth Circuit’s more conservative judges in a difficult position — are schoolchildren entitled to some degree of freedom of religious expression under well-established law, or are school officials entitled to qualified immunity on a federal civil rights claim?

Earlier coverage of the case is available from the “School Law” blog of Education Week; from Texas Lawyer’s “Tex Parte Blog” in posts titled “Principals not entitled to qualified immunity in religious viewpoint discrimination case” and “Candy cane case continues with Paul Clement representing old-school amici“; and from the “Legal Clips” blog of the National School Boards Association (here and here).

“This case poses the question of whether there is a vindictive judge or cowardly counsel exception to the contemporaneous objection rule.” So begins an opinion that Circuit Judge Ed Carnes issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

“Vote Hurts Obama’s Push to Empty Cuba Prison”: Charlie Savage of The New York Times has a news update that begins, “Congress voted Wednesday to impose strict new limits on transferring detainees out of the Guantanamo Bay prison, dealing a major blow to President Obama’s vows to shut down the center and give federal court trials to many of the prisoners.”

“Supreme Court rules against Miller”: The Anchorage Daily News has an update that begins, “The Alaska Supreme Court today ruled against Joe Miller on all counts, a decision that leaves his challenge of Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s victory on life support.”

The Associated Press reports that “Alaska high court throws out Miller claims.”

And at his “Election Law Blog,” law professor Rick Hasen has a post titled “Breaking News: Alaska Supreme Court Rejects Miller Appeal, Says Certification Can Go Forward.”

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

“Senate Confirms Five Judicial Nominees”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post that begins, “President Barack Obama’s nominees for three circuit judgeships and two district judgeships in Washington won confirmation today, as other judicial nominees remained in limbo.”

And The Salt Lake Tribune has a news update headlined “Scott Matheson Jr. OK’d for appeals court position.”

In the January 2011 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh will have an article headlined “Corporate Rights Are Again at Issue as AT&T Wants to Keep Info a Secret.”

Mark Curriden will have an article headlined “Judging the Judges: Landmark Iowa Elections Send Tremor Through the Judicial Retention System.”

And Leslie A. Gordon will have an article headlined “For Federal Plaintiffs, Twombly and Iqbal Still Present a Catch-22.”

“A Pick for Sensitive Justice Post”: In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Evan Perez has an article that begins, “The Obama administration plans to nominate a veteran Washington lawyer to head the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department unit that has been the center of ideological battles over national security during the past decade. A senior administration official said Tuesday that President Barack Obama’s nomination of Virginia Seitz is expected early in 2011, aiming to end a seven-year vacancy without a Senate-confirmed head in the office.”

And at the “Lawfare” blog, Jack Goldsmith has a related post titled “New Nominee for Office of Legal Counsel.”

“We address the viability of a takings claim arising out of a rent control ordinance affecting mobile home parks.” So begins the opinion that the majority on an eleven-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today in Guggenheim v. City of Goleta. Senior Circuit Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld, who dissented from the original three-judge panel’s decision before taking senior status on June 12, 2010, wrote today’s en banc majority opinion.

Senior Circuit Judge Alfred T. Goodwin sat on the original three-judge panel that issued the Ninth Circuit’s first ruling in this case, and thus Judge Goodwin qualified for the lottery to determine who would sit on the eleven-judge en banc panel. On the original three-judge panel, Judge Goodwin joined in the opinion from which Judge Kleinfeld dissented. Today, Judge Goodwin joins in Judge Kleinfeld’s majority opinion for the en banc court.

Of course, today’s en banc result comes as no surprise to law professor Shaun Martin of the “California Appellate Report” blog, who predicted it on the day the original three-judge panel’s decision issued.

Earlier this year, law professor Richard A. Epstein posted online an article about the three-judge panel’s ruling titled “Takings Law Made Hard” at SSRN.

“Detainee Review Proposal Is Prepared for President”: In today’s edition of The New York Times, Charlie Savage has an article that begins, “President Obama’s advisers have been drafting an executive order that would set up a system for periodically reviewing the cases of Guantanamo prisoners whom courts have approved for detention without trial, officials said.”

“Narragansetts fail in effort to win land-trust status in Rhode Island”: This article appears today in The Providence Journal.

“Patrick looks for another SJC first; Asian-American Duffly is nominee”: The Boston Globe contains this article today.

“Carolinas settle water-use case; Dispute between the two states was headed to the U.S. Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The State of Columbia, South Carolina.

“Justices recuse themselves in office-building case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “All seven members of the California Supreme Court on Tuesday recused themselves from hearing an appeal by the Schwarzenegger administration regarding the sale of state office buildings.”

And the “At the Lectern” blog has a post titled “State-buildings-sale case back to the Supreme Court; Supreme Court recuses itself.”

“Justice Breyer’s Sharp Aim”: Pauline Maier will have this op-ed Wednesday in The New York Times.

“States try to counter Supreme Court’s minimum-price ruling”: Joan Biskupic will have this article Wednesday in USA Today.

“Blogger gets 33 months for threatening Chicago judges on Internet; The blogger, a former Internet radio talk show host, was angry at three federal appeals court judges for upholding a Chicago gun ban; In his blog he wrote the judges ‘deserve to be killed'”: Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

The Chicago Tribune has a news update headlined “Right-wing blogger Hal Turner gets 33-month prison sentence; Blogger wrote that 3 Chicago-based judges ‘deserved to be killed.’”

And Reuters reports that “U.S. radio host gets prison for threatening judges.”

“Senate judicial confirmations skip 2 California nominees; As stalling on Obama’s judicial nominees eases, it seems Goodwin Liu and Edward M. Chen won’t get a vote; Republicans oppose both”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Josh Richman of The Oakland Tribune has a news update headlined “Boalt dean Liu’s nomination to federal appeals court appears dead — for now.”

And The Providence (R.I.) Journal reports today that “Time running out on judicial nominee.”

“After Fall of ‘Don’t Ask,’ Pushing for ‘I Do'”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

“Newspaper Lawsuit Factory Sues Over ‘Death Ray’ Image”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“Shock jock Hal Turner gets 33-month prison sentence”: The Bergen (N.J.) Record has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Man who blogged ‘judges must die’ sentenced in NY.”

“Appeals court denies request to rehear case on roadside crosses”: The Salt Lake Tribune has this news update.

And The Deseret News has an update that begins, “10th Circuit denies petition to re-hear UHP cross case.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Tenth Circuit order denying rehearing en banc by a 5-4 vote and the dissents therefrom can be accessed here.

“Senate deal cuts Butler from federal judgeship vote; Move paves way for confirmation vote on 19 noncontroversial judicial nominations”: This article appears today in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

“Specter prepares his farewell after 30 years in the Senate”: Thomas Fitzgerald has this front page article today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Specter assails ideological ‘cannibalism’ in Senate in farewell speech.”

CNN.com has a blog post titled “Specter issues parting blow to Roberts, Alito.”

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post titled “On Way Out, Specter Calls for Rule Changes.”

“Top NY court upholds dismissal of golf ‘Fore’ suit”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Slices, hooks and other errant shots are a common hazard on the links and a golfer can’t expect to get a warning shout of ‘Fore!’ every time a ball comes his way, New York’s top court ruled Tuesday in dismissing a personal injury lawsuit.”

You can access today’s ruling of the New York State Court of Appeals at this link.

“‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ lawsuits to remain active”: The Associated Press has this report.

By a vote of 5-4, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denies rehearing en banc in the Utah highway patrol roadside memorial crosses case: You can access the order denying rehearing en banc and the two dissents therefrom at this link.

My earlier coverage of the three-judge panel’s ruling (which was reissued today to replace the word “universally” with the word “widely”) appears at this link.

“Justices to leave office despite state legal challenge”: Grant Schulte of The Des Moines Register has a blog post that begins, “Three Iowa Supreme Court justices voted out of office last month will leave as scheduled, despite a legal challenge that had sought to keep them on the bench.”

“N.J. Senate Democrats urge Supreme Court Justice Rivera-Soto to resign for abstaining on cases”: The Newark Star-Ledger has this news update.

“Jurisprudential shell game: Health reform lawsuits sneak ‘Lochnerism’ back from constitutional exile.” Simon Lazarus has this essay in this week’s issue of The National Law Journal.

“Quiet deal on Obama’s judge nominees in the Senate”: The Associated Press has this report.

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post titled “2nd Circuit Is Back in Democrats’ Hands.”