“Cebull misconduct investigation finds judge sent hundreds of emails related to ‘race, politics, gender,’ more”: The Great Falls (Mont.) Tribune has a news update that begins, “A review of four years’ worth of emails from former Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull’s federal email account found ‘hundreds’ of emails ‘related to race, politics, religion, gender, sexual orientation and politically sensitive issues that were inappropriate for Judge Cebull to have sent from his federal email account.'”
And The Associated Press reports that “Federal judge sent hundreds of bigoted emails.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States at this link.
“Judicial Giant Quietly Retired Under Investigation For Travel Expenses”: TPM Muckraker has a report that begins, “When federal appellate court judge Boyce F. Martin Jr. announced his retirement in July, he was praised as ‘one of the giants of the Kentucky judiciary.'”
You can access today’s ruling of the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States at this link. In response to that ruling, the Judicial Council of the Second Circuit today posted online this order dated June 20, 2013.
“Will Supreme Court Cellphone Case Help Justin Bieber?” Jess Bravin has this post at WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog.
“Court ruling helps bloggers in libel cases”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.
Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Blogger protected by 1st Amendment, appeals court says.”
Dan Levine of Reuters has a report headlined “Blogger gets same speech protections as traditional press: U.S. court.”
Tal Kopan of Politico.com has a blog post titled “Appeals court rules blogger, press get same protections.”
At the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner has a post titled “Bloggers Get First Amendment Protections in Defamation Lawsuits; An appeals court rules that bloggers are just like trained journalists when it comes to the U.S. Constitution.”
And at her “Trial Insider” blog, Pamela A. MacLean has a post titled “Bloggers Win Media First Amendment Protections.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Ninth Circuit ruling appears at this link.
“Appeals court hears Missouri flag desecration case”: The Associated Press has this report on a case argued yesterday at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. You can access the oral argument audio via this link.
“Mass. appeals court upholds inmate’s right to taxpayer-funded sex change surgery”: The Boston Globe has this news update.
And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court upholds sex change for Mass. inmate.”
You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit at this link.
“Court revives NY law on crisis pregnancy centers”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.
“Apple to Appeal Ruling Rejecting Bid to Block Monitor”: Bloomberg News has this report.
“Appeals court tosses EPA rule for Indian Country”: Jeremy P. Jacobs of Greenwire has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.
“Make Journalists Testify: The press is wrong to demand a reporter’s privilege for James Risen.” Law professor Eric Posner has this essay online at Slate.
Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted today’s Order List, granting review in three cases, at this link.
In early news coverage, Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court takes cases on cellphone searches.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Mobile-Phone Searches by Police Get Top U.S. Court Review.”
Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court to weigh cell phone searches by police.”
Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “High court to examine cellphone privacy; Upon arrest, can police search your cellphone or Smartphone for evidence of criminal activity, or is that an invasion of privacy?”
At Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Supreme Court to Decide if Warrants Needed to Search Mobile Phones.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to rule on cellphone privacy.”
“Ex-Michigan Supreme Court Justice Hathaway wants out of prison early”: The Detroit News has this update.
“Pennsylvania judge strikes down state’s voter ID law”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has this news update.
And The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has a news update headlined “Voter ID decision an indictment of Pennsylvania’s law, plaintiffs say.”
My earlier coverage of today’s ruling can be accessed here.
In news coverage of two notable D.C. Circuit rulings issued today: At his “Suits & Sentences” blog, Michael Doyle of McClatchy Washington Bureau has a post titled “Appeals court rejects damages bid by ex-Gitmo detainee.” You can access the ruling at this link.
And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Jenna Greene has a post titled “D.C. Circuit Revives Lobbyists’ Fight Over Obama Ban.” You can access the ruling at this link.
“Court lets Gawker post Hulk Hogan sex tape”: The Tampa Bay Times has a news update that begins, “A temporary order banning the Gawker website from posting excerpts from a sex tape with professional wrestler Hulk Hogan should be reversed, Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeal said in a ruling issued Friday.”
You can access today’s ruling of Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal at this link.
“This case requires us to address a question of first impression: What First Amendment protections are afforded a blogger sued for defamation?” So begins an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today. Law professor Eugene Volokh represented on appeal the blogger who prevailed in today’s ruling.
Update: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a post titled “Bloggers = Media for First Amendment Libel Law Purposes.”
The contents of the January 2014 issue of the Harvard Law Review are now available online: Via this link.
Among other things, the issue contains Recent Cases essays titled “Tenth Circuit Holds For-Profit Corporate Plaintiffs Likely to Succeed on the Merits of Substantial Burden on Religious Exercise Claim“; “Ninth Circuit Holds Forensic Search of Laptop Seized at Border Requires Showing of Reasonable Suspicion“; “Third Circuit Limits Censorship of ‘Ambiguously Lewd’ Speech“; “Florida Supreme Court Holds that Cell Phone Data Is Not Subject to the Search-Incident-to-Arrest Exception“; and “Sixth Circuit Finds Law School Applicants Could Not Reasonably Rely on School-Provided Employment Statistics.”
“Schaerr Leaves Winston to Represent Utah in Marriage Case”: Tony Mauro has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”
Upcoming potential oral argument of note: Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit gave notice that the case of Duchesneau v. Cornell Univ. has been tentatively listed on the merits for Thursday, March 6, 2014.
Readers who are interested in learning about the case can access online my client’s Brief for Appellant, Cornell’s Brief for Appellee, and my client’s Reply Brief for Appellant.
Earlier news coverage of the case can be accessed here and here. And the district court’s opinion in support of its order denying plaintiff’s post-judgment motion can be accessed here.
“Judge spikes photo ID requirement for Pa. voters”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that a single judge serving on the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued today.
At his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen has a post titled “Initial Thoughts on Today’s Ruling Striking Down Pa’s Voter ID Law on State Grounds.”
“A plea to cast aside Korematsu“: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Senate Judiciary Committee OKs Utah appeals judge, again”: Thomas Burr of The Salt Lake Tribune has this report.
And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Todd Ruger has a post titled “Senate Judiciary Committee Approves 29 Judicial Nominees.”
“Supreme Court of Canada will hear B.C. couple’s appeal of assisted dying case”: The Vancouver Sun has this report.
And Sean Fine of The Globe and Mail of Toronto reports that “B.C. women’s case reopens Supreme Court’s assisted-suicide debate.”
“Appeal filed in Oklahoma same-sex marriage ruling”: This front page article appears today in The Tulsa World.
“Wyoming Supreme Court hears grizzly records case”: The Associated Press has this report. Readers of delicate sensibilities should keep in mind that the records involved are grizzly, not grisly.
“If Supreme Court doesn’t modify recess appointments, Senate should modify rules”: This editorial appears in The Washington Post.
“Halls of justice too tight for ND Supreme Court; chief justice says more space needed”: The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead, North Dakota contains this article today.
“‘Raging Bull’ Fight to Hit Supreme Court; Fox and MGM could lose rights to Martin Scorsese’s film if the original screenwriter’s daughter wins the case, which the studios insist was filed too late”: Eriq Gardner had this post recently at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.
“Mandatory life sentences for juveniles at issue before state high court; 37-year-old inmate asks justices to retroactively apply new standard to his case”: This article appeared yesterday in The Chicago Tribune.
“Supreme Court to Consider Cellphone Privacy”: Ariane de Vogue has this post at “The Note” blog of ABC News.
