“Prosser asks two judges to drop out of ethics case”: Friday’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contained an article that begins, “State Supreme Court Justice David Prosser asked Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley to step aside in his ethics case Thursday in filings that accused Bradley of conducting a public-relations campaign against him.” And yesterday’s newspaper contained an article headlined “Justices disagree on ethics case’s standing; Prosser, Abrahamson dispute phase of complaint amid demands for recusal.”
Meanwhile, in other coverage, Bloomberg News reports that “Wisconsin High Court Judge Seeks Accuser’s Recusal From Case.”
“Supreme Court ruling vital to Indian health coverage; At stake are aspects of reform law to enhance access, behavioral care”: This article appears today in The Sioux Falls (S.D.) Argus Leader.
“Supreme Court to hear Ariz. pharmaceutical case; It pits drugmakers, sales reps over OT”: Today’s edition of The Arizona Republic contains an article that begins, “A Mesa-based law firm will bring a case before the U.S. Supreme Court this week that could answer whether 90,000 pharmaceutical sales representatives nationwide are eligible for overtime pay.”
“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Do Arizona, Obamists even like each other?” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.
“Mitt Romney, the Supreme Court’s Best Friend? The Republican presidential candidate once worried about ‘judicial activism,’ but now ‘judicial review’ is the buzzword for Obama’s opponents.” Molly Ball has this article online at The Atlantic.
And in yesterday’s edition of The Chicago Tribune, law professor Geoffrey R. Stone had an op-ed entitled “When is judicial activism appropriate?”
“Age discrimination case has been stressful for Iowan; His Supreme Court battle resulted in a tighter standard for proving age bias; Now, lawmakers are trying to change it back”: The Des Moines Register contains this article today.
“Pa. appeals court upholds awarding of embryos to wife”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer reporting on a ruling that the Superior Court of Pennsylvania issued on Wednesday.
“Wal-Mart ruling that quashed many class actions helps bolster Merrill Lynch broker’s case; Victory in federal appeals court surprises many legal experts”: Ameet Sachdev will have this article Sunday in The Chicago Tribune.
“America’s cowboy capitalism was long ago disarmed by a democratic process increasingly dominated by powerful groups with economic interests antithetical to competitors and consumers. And the courts, from which the victims of burdensome regulation sought protection, have been negotiating the terms of surrender since the 1930s.” So writes D.C. Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown in a must-read concurring opinion issued today.
In commentary available online at The Atlantic: Law professor Lawrence Lessig has an essay entitled “Why Scalia Could Uphold Obamacare.”
And law professor Jack M. Balkin has an essay entitled “How Obama Can Attack the Supreme Court — and Win.”
“If Health Insurance Mandates Are Unconstitutional, Why Did the Founding Fathers Back Them?” Law professor Einer Elhauge has this essay online at The New Republic.
“Judges sharply question EPA, petitioners during cross-state rule arguments”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has a report that begins, “In a vigorously contested oral argument, a federal appeals court today considered the legality of a key Obama administration regulation aimed at limiting air pollution that crosses state lines.”
“Clemens Retrial Set to Begin With Prosecutors on Notice”: This article appears today in The New York Times.
“Interview: How District Judge Jed Rakoff makes the calls.” Reuters has this interesting report.
“Review of 28 of disgraced judge’s cases finds no bias, impairment”: Bill Rankin and Rhonda Cook have this article today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
And The Associated Press reports that “Review finds judge showed no bias.”
“Lawyers spar over funding in Guantanamo court; The legal team defending the Saudi man accused of planning the bombing of the USS Cole say they don’t have adequate resources to prepare their case”: Carol Rosenberg has this article today in The Miami Herald.
“Public TV Political Ad Ban Unconstitutional, Court Rules”: Bloomberg News has this report.
The “Media Decoder” blog of The New York Times has a post titled “Ruling Clears Way for Political Ads on Public Stations.”
And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella has a post titled “9th Circuit: Public Radio, TV Stations Can Run Political Advertising.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Ninth Circuit ruling appears at this link.
Harvey Birdman loses Third Circuit appeal: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued this ruling today.
“Honoring O’Connor’s Legacy at the Supreme Court”: Adam Liptak has this post at “The Caucus” blog of The New York Times.
And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Supreme Court Women: The Power of Four.”
C-SPAN provides access to the video of yesterday evening’s event via this link.
“U.S. ban on political ads on public TV struck down”: Jonathan Stempel and Terry Baynes of Reuters have a report that begins, “A divided U.S. appeals court struck down a federal ban on political advertising on public TV and radio stations, a decision that could open the public airwaves to a heavy dose of campaign ads leading up to the November elections.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Calif high court rules in lunch break labor case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The California Supreme Court said Thursday that employers are under no obligation to ensure that workers take legally mandated lunch and rest breaks.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.
“Calif high court to decide lunch break lawsuit”: The Associated Press has this report.
“Obama Won’t Order Ban on Gay Bias by Employers”: The New York Times contains this article today.
“One gay marriage case slowing”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Gov. Christie’s office continues search for new N.J. Supreme Court nominee”: MaryAnn Spoto has this article today in The Newark Star-Ledger.
“In wake of ‘Taj Mahal’ scandal, Florida Supreme Court approves new lobbying rules for judges”: This article appeared yesterday in The Tampa Bay Times.
“Women Supreme Court Justices Celebrate 30 Years Since Court’s First Female”: Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post has this report.
“4 Supreme Court women take same stage”: The Associated Press has this report.
“MPAA: you can infringe copyright just by embedding a video.” “ars technica” has this post about an appeal pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
“Agency and Equity: Why Do We Blame Clients for Their Lawyers’ Mistakes?” Adam Liptak has this article in the April 2012 issue of the Michigan Law Review.
“Ross Guberman critiques the government’s health care brief”: This post appears today at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Poll: More Americans expect Supreme Court’s health-care decision to be political.” Robert Barnes and Scott Clement have this article today in The Washington Post.
“Court restricts U.S. in Goldman programmer ruling”: Reuters has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court set limits on the government’s ability to prosecute alleged corporate espionage, in an opinion Wednesday explaining its February decision to throw out the conviction of a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc computer programmer.”
You can access today’s opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
Peter Lattman of The New York Times covered the Second Circuit’s announcement of its decision in February 2012 in an article headlined “Government Dealt Setback in Case Against Ex-Goldman Programmer.”
Access online the current installment of the “Appellate Issues” newsletter of the American Bar Association’s Council of Appellate Lawyers: The Spring 2012 issue can be accessed here.
“Easton Area School District ‘Boobies’ appeal goes before federal court; Attorneys in Easton Area bracelet case argue over the meaning of the word, students’ intent”: Peter Hall has this article today in The Allentown Morning Call.
And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court hears Pa. ‘boobies’ bracelets case.”
I will provide a link to the audio of yesterday’s oral argument once the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit posts the file online.
