“Judge dismisses challenge to gay marriage barriers; Hennepin County judge said a 1971 state Supreme Court ruling and state law prohibit same-sex marriage”: The Minneapolis Star Tribune contains this article today.

“The Empire strikes back in copyright row: Judges forced to rule on who owns Stormtrooper helmet.” This article appears today in The Daily Mail (UK).

“Specter Reinvents Himself as a Solo Practitioner”: Gina Passarella of The Legal Intelligencer has this report.

“James Madison U.’s Elimination of 10 Sports Teams Was Legal, Appeals Court Affirms”: The Chronicle of Higher Education has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued yesterday.

“U.S. Appeals Ruling Striking Down Health-Care Law Over Insurance Mandate”: Bloomberg News has this report.

“Pa. high court OKs King of Prussia casino”: The Philadelphia Inquirer has this news update.

And The Bucks County Courier Times has a news update headlined “Court approves Valley Forge Casino.”

Today’s 3-2 ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of a majority opinion and two dissenting opinions (here and here).

“Their Own Private Hell: Will the Supreme Court’s evolving view of privacy undermine the First Amendment?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“AmEx Can’t Bar Merchants’ Class Actions, Appeals Court Says”: Bloomberg News has this report on a ruling that a two-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

This case, which the Second Circuit considered on GVR from the U.S. Supreme Court, is another in a line of cases addressing the interplay between arbitration and class action practice.

Transcript of the recent Third Circuit reargument en banc in which I participated: Today, the transcript of last month’s reargument en banc of the challenge to the class certification of the De Beers antitrust settlement was electronically filed, and you can access a copy of that oral argument transcript by clicking here. The audio of the en banc reargument remains available online via this link (81.5MB Windows Media audio file).

On February 25, 2011, I had a post titled “Handouts and demonstratives at an appellate oral argument” in which I linked to Class Counsel’s motion for leave to file the handout that Class Counsel had wanted to use at oral argument and the response that I filed to that motion.

Within hours after I filed that response, Class Counsel filed a document titled “Motion by Appellees to Strike Portions of Appellant Quinn’s Unauthorized Brief in the Guise of a Response to Motion to file Handouts.” In the alternative, Class Counsel’s motion stated that “Appellees respectfully request leave to file a response to the points raised in the unauthorized brief and that there be no further reply by Quinn.”

Moments ago, and two days before my response to the motion to strike was due, the Third Circuit issued an order denying the motion to strike, allowing Class Counsel to file a response by a specified date, denying Class Counsel’s request that my client be prohibited from filing any reply, and consequently allowing my client to file a reply by a specified date.

“Al-Haramain appeal to be heard by 9th circuit court”: Today’s edition of The Mail Tribune of Medford, Oregon contains an article that begins, “Federal appeals court judges will convene Wednesday in Portland to hear arguments over whether the federal government violated the U.S. Constitution in designating Pete Seda’s defunct Ashland-based Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation chapter as a terrorist organization in 2004.”

“Calif. high court grapples with defining pimp”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Justices again rein in exemption to FOIA”: Tony Mauro has this news analysis online at the First Amendment Center.

“Iowa courts struggling with application of U.S. Supreme Court ruling; Family of man convicted in 1994 when he was 17 hope federal decision can lead to parole”: This article — the first in a two-part series — appears online at the web site of The Iowa Independent.

“High court ruling will establish groundwork for hepatitis outbreak trials”: Today’s edition of The Las Vegas Review-Journal contains an article that begins, “Nurses can do a lot of things, but they can’t testify as experts about the cause of a hepatitis C outbreak, an attorney told the Nevada Supreme Court on Monday.”

And in other news from Nevada, The Las Vegas Sun reports today that “Chief justice touts budget savings of Nevada Supreme Court.”

“Government Does An About Face on Amicus Brief in Rubashkin v. U.S.” The Washington Legal Foundation’s “Legal Pulse” blog has this post.

My earlier coverage of this matter can be accessed here.

“Top jurist urges review of ‘coercive’ plea bargaining system”: Kirk Makin has this article today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.

“Supreme Court Declines to Take Puerto Rico Canal Case”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has this report.

“House Speaker Dean Cannon wants to expand state Supreme Court to 10 justices, two panels”: The St. Petersburg Times today contains an article that begins, “Under a dramatic overhaul of the state court system proposed by House Speaker Dean Cannon on Monday, Gov. Rick Scott could end up choosing three new Supreme Court justices.”

“Indian Island case could remain tied up in courts despite Supreme Court ruling”: Today’s edition of The Peninsula Daily News of Port Angeles, Washington contains an article that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Navy cannot use a particular exemption in the Freedom of Information Act to withhold explosives data and maps showing extent of damage if there were an explosion at Naval Magazine Indian Island.”

The Leader of Port Townsend, Washington reports today that “Supreme Court rules 8-1 against Navy in public records request for info on Naval Magazine Indian Island.”

The Seattle Times reports that “High court rules rules against Navy in Wash. state ammo depot case; A Lake Forest Park man’s U.S. Supreme Court case becomes a big win for freedom of information.”

And at his “Under the Radar” blog at Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has a post titled “Major transparency win at Supreme Court.”

“Sonia Sotomayor on Dating, Deciding, and Being the Newest Supreme Court Justice”: James Warren has this blog post online at The Atlantic, reporting on Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s appearance yesterday at Northwestern University School of Law.

The Daily Northwestern also mentions Justice Sotomayor’s visit in an article headlined “Schapiro: Sex toy scandal does not define Northwestern.”

“Next chapter in recopyright law: Supreme Court.” Today’s edition of The Denver Post contains an article that begins, “After a 10-year journey through the legal minor leagues, a Denver symphony conductor’s suit against the federal government has made it to law’s biggest stage.”

“What Are Your Chances of Winning on Appeal?” The March 2011 installment of my “On Appeal” column, which you can access by clicking here, appears in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

This month’s column begins, “One thing that the administrators who help run appellate courts are good at is statistics.”

“Supreme Court Deciding Whether Congress May Copyright Public Domain Works”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“Backers of CA gay marriage ban dismiss Obama stand”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Justices Allow Inmates To Sue for DNA Testing”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court opens way for prisoners to try to gain access to DNA evidence.”

In Tuesday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage will have an article headlined “Justices rule for death row inmate who wants DNA testing; The Supreme Court says Texas inmate Hank Skinner can pursue his legal fight for DNA tests he says could prove him innocent.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has a news update headlined “Supreme Court rules in favor of prisoners in DNA case.”

The Houston Chronicle has a news update headlined “High court OKs DNA challenge for Texan.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Supreme Court says Texas inmate has right to DNA testing.”

Ariane de Vogue of ABCNews.com reports that “Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Death-Row Inmate Seeking DNA Evidence; Henry ‘Hank’ Skinner Can Challenge His Conviction as a Civil Rights Claim.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “DNA Evidence Bid Supported in U.S. Supreme Court Ruling.”

At Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Condemned Inmate Wins Right to Seek DNA.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “A limited DNA access plea allowed.”

“High court rejects suit over ‘In God We Trust'”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this news update.

“No Crime, but an Arrest and Two Strip-Searches”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“A major test of copyright power: The Court agrees to examine whether Congress may restore copyright protection for a creative work once that legal shield has expired and the work has entered the public domain.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

And the blog “Patently-O” has a post titled “Copyright: Supreme Court to Hear Constitutional Challenge to Copyright Restoration.”

“Former 5th Circuit chief judge dies”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Charles Edward Clark, who served 23 years on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals including 11 years as chief judge, has died. He was 85.”

“Obama restarts Guantanamo trials”: The Associated Press has this report.

And one week ago today, Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald had an article headlined “Inside the convicts cellblock where war criminals stay at Guantanamo.”

“Judge Hall died on February 26, 2011, before this opinion could be filed. She had previously circulated her dissent, with instructions to file it with the majority opinion.” So states footnote one to a decision that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

Perhaps some readers of this blog will recall that the February 21, 2006 installment of my “On Appeal” column published at law.com was headlined “Dead Judges Voting: When Does Life Tenure End?” Of course, because a dissenting opinion doesn’t really count for anything, issuing a dissent written by a judge who died before the decision was actually handed down is perhaps less objectionable and could even be viewed as a magnanimous act by the majority.

Articles of note available online from SSRN: Law professor Lucas S. Osborn has an article titled “Instrumentalism at the Federal Circuit” (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

And professor Chris Edelson has an article titled “Judging in a Vacuum, or, Once More, Without Feeling: How Justice Scalia’s Jurisprudential Approach Repeats Errors Made in Plessy v. Ferguson” (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

“1960 anonymous-speech ruling still resonates”: David L. Hudson Jr. has this news analysis online today at the First Amendment Center.

A not particularly law-related book containing many amazing photographs that recently arrived in the mail: Here at the nerve center of the “How Appealing” blog, books occasionally arrive in the mail, and often I’ll put up a post noting their arrival if they might be of interest to this blog’s readership.

Sometimes those books are written by appellate judges or news reporters who cover the courts or legal issues. At least once, I’ve linked to a book written by the wife of a judge. Last August, I linked here to my wife’s book, which, I’m pleased to say, recently received a nomination for a 2010 Bram Stoker Award from the Horror Writers Association in the category “Superior Achievement in Nonfiction.”

Today, I have the pleasure of linking to a book written by a former appellate client. The book is “Streamlined Irons,” by Jay Raymond. You can read a very positive review of the book at this link. Wired.com’s “Gadget Lab” blog had this post about the book. And you can view some sample pages from this very visually appealing book via this link.

“Top Georgia court upholds state’s voter ID law”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the Supreme Court of Georgia issued today.