“The majority seems to imagine ‘probable cause’ as a cloud that follows certain people around, created by their idiosyncratic habits and irresponsible friends, and persisting even though the individuals are not suspected of any particular crime.” So begins the opinion of Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon, dissenting from the ruling that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.
The opening paragraph of Judge Berzon’s dissent continues:
This “probable cause” cloud, the majority imagines, is available for invocation by law enforcement to justify virtually any search. But, as the case law makes clear, probable cause does not exist in the air. And probable cause to think that someone is odd or a slob or that his friend is a negligent father does not justify seizing and searching his computers.
The final substantive paragraph of Judge Berzon’s dissent begins, “I cannot help but think that had this case involved anything but child pornography, it would come out differently.”
Because the deciding vote on the three-judge panel was provided by a senior U.S. District Judge visiting from outside of the Ninth Circuit, this case may have a better than average prospect for rehearing en banc.
“Md.’s wine shipment laws create smuggling routes from D.C. and Va.” This article appears today in The Washington Post.
“Loudoun judge defies Va. Supreme Court, continues to reopen immigrants’ cases”: Tom Jackman has this article today in The Washington Post.
“The Information: How the Internet gets inside us.” Adam Gopnik has this “A Critic at Large” essay in the February 14, 2011 issue of The New Yorker.
“Judges: Senate should confirm Graves.” The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contains this editorial today.
“Personal Privacy and the Right to Know”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.
“Badger Catholic case may go to U.S. Supreme Court”: The Daily Cardinal, the student newspaper of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, contains this article today.
“Justice talks possible health care repeal case”: Today’s edition of The GW Hatchet contains an article that begins, “Americans should not expect a case examining the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s health care law to be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Thursday night.”
At Newsweek.com, columnist Ezra Klein has an essay entitled “The Justice Will See You Now: The fate of Obama’s health-care law may rest with one man.”
And at National Review Online, Robert VerBruggen has an essay entitled “An Obamacare Roadblock: Does the Florida court ruling shut down implementation?”
“Patrick’s choices may change little on SJC”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “With yet another vacancy opening this spring, Deval Patrick has an opportunity to put a bigger stamp on the Supreme Judicial Court than any governor since Francis W. Sargent in the 1970s. But Patrick, over the long run, is unlikely to transform the ideological imprint of a bench that, even when dominated by Republican appointees, became the first high court in the nation to legalize gay marriage.”
In commentary published in today’s edition of The Des Moines Register: The newspaper contains an editorial entitled “Stand firm on civil rights, Iowa” that begins, “No one ever said fighting for equal rights was easy. And no one ever said it was quick, either. In 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court issued a ruling that paved the way for gay marriage. It was a victory to be celebrated. But it wasn’t the end of a quest to obtain equality for all Iowans.”
The newspaper’s editor, Rick Green, has an op-ed entitled “Register will report, air both sides of this story.”
Columnist Kathie Obradovich has an op-ed entitled “Yes, judges: Try a dose of politics” that begins, “Former Iowa Supreme Court Justice Michael Streit can quote the alt-rock band Green Day with nearly the same degree of credibility that he holds forth on abstract points of jurisprudence. He’s a natural politician, and I mean that in the best possible way.”
An excerpt from Iowa Governor Terry Branstad’s recent discussion with the newspaper’s editorial board appears under the headline “Branstad: I think the court made a mistake.”
An excerpt from Iowa state senate majority leader Mike Gronstal’s recent discussion with the newspaper’s editorial board appears under the headline “Gronstal: I won’t put your rights to a vote.”
Stephanie Bell has a very interesting op-ed entitled “I thought I understood Iowa.”
And Ingrid Olson has an op-ed that begins, “Growing up on a farm in rural Iowa, my dreams were those of other young girls . . . marrying the love of my life. Reva and I have been together for 13 years and married for a year and a half. We were among the plaintiff couples in the lawsuit that sought the right to marry.”
“Bar None: Lawyers’ clients kept in dark on past issues.” This article appears today in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
“Lawyer won admiration at Penn, Supreme Court”: Today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an obituary that begins, “Ralph Spritzer, 93, emeritus professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and a leading appellate lawyer who argued more than 60 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, died of leukemia Sunday, Jan. 16, at his home in Tempe, Ariz.”
“GOP-led House is moving to restrict funding of abortions”: McClatchy Newspapers have this report.
“Next test of corporations’ liability? The Second Circuit has set the stage for a major dispute over corporations’ liability for wrongdoing to move on to the Supreme Court; The appeals court left intact a decision that they cannot be sued under a 1789 law.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Funds from odd places: Plaintiff firms helped fund Alabama Supreme Court Republican candidates.” This article appears today in The Birmingham News.
“Questions surround judicial nomination of Arvo Mikkanen for Tulsa”: Today’s edition of The Tulsa World contains an article that begins, “The White House enlisted surrogates to validate its pick to fill a vacant judicial slot in Tulsa, but it remained unclear whether that would be enough to rescue one of the few American Indians selected for the federal bench in U.S. history.”
“Congress’ power at heart of fight over health law”: John Lantigua has this article today in The Palm Beach Post.
“Ga. Supreme Court Justice travels amid Egypt uprising”: This article appeared yesterday in The Union-Recorder of Milledgeville, Georgia.
“Constitutional showdown: A Florida judge distorted the law in striking down healthcare reform.” Law professor Akhil Reed Amar has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Will Egyptian alliance come back to bite us?” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.
“Justice Clarence Thomas Delights Audiences at Ave Maria and Naples”: The Ave Herald has this report.
“Doing the Judicial Math on Health Care”: Adam Liptak will have this article in the Week in Review section of Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.
“Slain U.S. judge’s ruling upheld in immigrant case”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “A federal appeals court has upheld $78,000 in damages to illegal immigrants who were held at gunpoint by a rancher in the southern Arizona desert, a case that prompted death threats against a federal judge who was fatally shot last month in Tucson.”
The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Court upholds verdict against Arizona rancher who detained illegal immigrants on his land; A federal appeals court rules that Arizona rancher Roger Barnett must pay $87,000 to four illegal immigrants he detained at gunpoint; The court says the immigrants were not armed and didn’t threaten him.”
And The Arizona Daily Star reports that “Assault ruling upheld against rancher; now must pay $87K.”
You can access Thursday’s non-precedential ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Politics and the Court”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial that begins, “When it comes to pushing the line between law and politics, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas each had a banner month in January.”
“Nominee to Supreme Court easily wins Senate panel’s OK”: Ken Kobayashi has this article today in The Honolulu Star-Advertiser.
The “Record on Appeal” blog covered yesterday’s confirmation hearing live, and you can access that coverage via this link.
“Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas talks about ‘life’s calling’ during impromtu visit to Ave Maria University”: The Naples (Fla.) Daily News has this update.
And Politico.com reports that “Justice Thomas’s wife Virginia Thomas now a lobbyist.”
“2nd Cheshire Suspect’s Lawyers Want Trial Moved To Stamford; Cite Widespread Publicity In First Case”: The Hartford Courant has this news update.
The New Haven Register has a news update headlined “Komisarjevsky attorneys file motions seeking to move murder trial out of New Haven, disqualify judge.”
And The Associated Press reports that “2nd Conn. home invasion suspect wants trial moved.”
By a vote of 5-5, the Second Circuit fails to grant rehearing en banc of three-judge panel decision holding that corporations are not subject to liability under the Alien Tort Statute: Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an order denying panel rehearing (accompanied by separate opinions) and an order denying rehearing en banc by an evenly divided vote (also accompanied by separate opinions).
My earlier coverage of the original three-judge panel’s lengthy ruling can be accessed here.
Second Circuit holds that prosecution’s reliance on criminal defendant’s tattoo to establish guilt did not violate that defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination: You can access today’s interesting ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
Today’s ruling reasons that, although the tattoo was used in a manner that was testimonial and incriminating, the voluntary tattooing of an incriminating word on the defendant’s arm was not the result of government compulsion, and therefore no Fifth Amendment violation occurred.
“Fla. doctor’s terrorism conviction is upheld”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court has upheld the conviction of a doctor accused of offering to treat injured al-Qaida fighters.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
“[I]n this case the amount in controversy is $75,000 exactly–one penny short of the jurisdictional bar that Congress has set.” As a result, diversity of citizenship jurisdiction does not exist in federal court, and therefore the case in question must be returned to state court (from whence it had been removed) to be relitigated from the outset. You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit at this link.
“Judge rejects Orie request to delay corruption trial”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains this article today.
And The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports today that “Pa. GOP wants Orie’s charges tossed.”
“A Push to Open Hearings in Judge-Misconduct Cases”: The New York Times contains this article today.
“Antonin Scalia shoots from the hip on ‘undemocratic’ European Union”: This article appears today in The Australian.
And The Australia Associated Press has an article headlined “Cut the jargon and apply cocktail party test, says judge.”
“Panel OKs Graves nomination again; Judiciary Committee’s vote was second time Mississippi jurist approved”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article that begins, “The Senate Judiciary Committee voted unanimously Thursday to approve the nomination of Mississippi Supreme Court Justice James Graves for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”
