“Posner on Same-Sex Marriage: Then and Now.” Ronald K.L. Collins has this post today at “Concurring Opinions.”

“Justices’ Blind Eyes to Police Mistakes”: Kenneth Jost had this post yesterday at his blog, “Jost On Justice.”

“Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is lighting fuses in Oklahoma”: Columnist George F. Will has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“California Supreme Court nominee wins high praise from key panel”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle recently had this report.

“Shirley Abrahamson could be forced out of Supreme Court chief justice role”: In today’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Patrick Marley has an article that begins, “The legislative session that convenes in January could be the beginning of the end for state Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Republicans who control the Legislature are considering one measure that could push her out as chief justice and another that would set a retirement age for judges that could remove her from the court entirely.”

“A Curious Panel Selection Procedure”: Edward Whelan had this Ninth Circuit-related essay in last Monday’s issue of the Daily Journal of San Francisco.

“Protesters in contempt of court for anti-whaling campaign”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on Friday.

“Florida floating home owner who won US Supreme Court case loses retaliation battle”: The Associated Press has this report.

“The honeymoon’s over: Cote’s learning curve at Supreme Court will be steep and swift.” The Ottawa Citizen has this report.

“Court won’t stop lawsuit against Livingston County deputy in dog bite controversy”: The Associated Press has this report.

Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton wrote Friday’s ruling for a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

“3rd Circ. Affirms Life Term For NJ Atty In Witness Murder Plot”: Kelly Knaub of Law360.com has this report (subscription required for full access) on a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued on Thursday.

“Nevada Will Delve Into 21st Century Attribution”: Adam Klasfeld of Courthouse News Service has a report that begins, “In a case that might forever change attribution in the Digital Age, the 2nd Circuit asked Nevada’s highest court on Friday to decide whether linking to an accurately reported story is enough to dodge a defamation suit.”

Senior Circuit Judge Guido Calabresi wrote Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certifying two questions to the Supreme Court of Nevada.

The first certified question asks: “[D]oes a hyperlink to source material about judicial proceedings in an online petition suffice for purposes of applying the common law fair report privilege?”

“Lawsuit May Reshape Tourist Industry in History-Rich Savannah”: Alan Blinder has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Texas Supreme Court judge uses ‘Ferris Bueller’ references in libel case dissent”: The Houston Chronicle has this report.

My earlier coverage appears here and here.

“Oklahoma plans to use same drugs for upcoming executions”: Graham Lee Brewer has this article in today’s edition of The Oklahoman.

And today’s edition of The Tulsa World contains a front page article headlined “DOC director says state will use same execution drugs; Lethal combo used in April only one available, DOC chief says.”

In related news, The Associated Press reports that “Judge dismisses suit on Oklahoma execution access.”

I have posted at this link yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma on the issue of media access to executions in Oklahoma.

“Lawmakers jab Supreme Court: bill would make races partisan”: The Seattle Times has this report.

“U.S. Supreme Court to hear Gilbert church sign case in Jan.” The Arizona Republic has this report.

“The Greatest Lawyer Who Ever Lived: He’s the brashest, most generous, most foul-mouthed trial attorney in the country; And at 89, Joe Jamail can still command a courtroom, mother%*!$#@.” John Spong has this profile in the January 2015 issue of Texas Monthly magazine.

“SCOTUSblog on camera: Dahlia Lithwick (Part four).” You can view the video via this link.

“Ferris Bueller’s day in the Texas Supreme Court”: Eugene Volokh has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“Review of justices’ email after porn scandal finds nothing else inappropriate”: Peter Hall of The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania has this news update.

And Brad Bumsted of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has a news update headlined “Email review finds no improper contact between state Supreme Court justices, lawyers.”

You can access the report of the special counsel to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania regarding email exchanges with the Office of Attorney General at this link.

“U.S. court backs $2.1 million copyright award for song ‘Whoomp!'” Reuters has this report.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Fifth Circuit ruling can be accessed here.

“Two states sue to block Colorado marijuana markets”: Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Jonathan H. Adler has a post titled “Are Nebraska and Oklahoma just fair-weather federalists?”

My round-up posted last night of other news coverage of the lawsuit can be accessed here.

“The ‘nuclear option’ transforms Obama’s judicial legacy”: James Downie has this entry today at the “PostPartisan” blog of The Washington Post.

And at “Roll Call,” Niels Lesniewski has a blog post today titled “How the Nuclear Option Changed the Judiciary.”

Some of your favorite law blogs and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, forever linked in S.W.3d: Justice Don R. Willett of the Supreme Court of Texas issued this dissent from the denial of review today. In footnote three, Justice Willett’s dissent mentions various law blogs, including “How Appealing” and the guy who writes it.

Law professor Eugene Volokh prepared this amicus brief urging the grant of review in the case.

“Policing Vanity License Plates Is No Job for an EJIT; It Takes a Trained Eye, a Wide Vocabulary and a Dirty Mind”: Jacob Gershman had this article in yesterday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Should En Banc Review Correct Obvious Errors?” Richard M. Re has this post at “Re’s Judicata.”

“Lawyer Won’t Have to Pay Up After Issuing $1 Million Challenge on TV; Appeals court says the ‘offer,’ made on NBC’s ‘Dateline,’ was merely a figure of speech”: Eriq Gardner has this post at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

At “Concurring Opinions,” Lawrence Cunningham has a post titled “Million Dollar Reward Case Over.”

And at “Appellate Briefs,” Benjamin Gould has a post titled “A million-dollar challenge isn’t a contract, says the Eleventh Circuit.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.

“U.S. Appeals Court Expands Gun Rights; Man Committed to Mental Institution Decades Ago Can’t Be Blocked From Buying Gun”: Ashby Jones of The Wall Street Journal has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued yesterday.

You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

“Whoomp! (There It Is)” on appeal: Circuit Judge Stephen A. Higginson (whom I had the pleasure of meeting at last month’s AJEI Summit in Dallas) issued this ruling today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

In early news coverage, Law360.com reports that “5th Circ. Affirms $2.1M Verdict In Rap Song Rights Fight” (subscription required for full access).

Second Circuit goes all “in”: Via the Second Circuit’s web site, you can access the text of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35, which governs rehearing en banc.

Unwilling to bow to the pressure of conformity, however, today the Second Circuit issued an order granting rehearing “in banc” in a case. Lest anyone think that might represent an unintentional oversight, today’s order invokes the term “in banc” a total of five times.

Back in December 2008, I had a post in which I non-prophetically observed that “[i]n news of significance to appellate geeks everywhere, it appears that the Second Circuit has finally abandoned ‘in banc’ in favor of ‘en banc.'”

Between then and now, I had another seven posts in which, with repeated assists from the Second Circuit, I proved myself wrong (see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).

Thank you, Second Circuit, for prolonging this controversy. Were it not for you, I might have spent the past 30 minutes covering the actual substance of appellate court rulings issued today.

“Terror victims to 2nd Circuit: Let case vs PLO go to trial next month.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

“Broad liability waivers are ‘unconscionable,’ paralyzed snowboarder can sue Mt. Bachelor, Supreme Court rules”: Aimee Green of The Oregonian has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Oregon high court says injured snowboarder can sue.”

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

“Nebraska and Oklahoma Sue Colorado Over Marijuana Law”: Jack Healy will have this article in Friday’s edition of The New York Times.

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Nebraska, Oklahoma sue Colorado over legal marijuana.”

USA Today reports that “Colorado sued by neighboring states over legal pot.”

Nathan Koppel of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Colorado’s Marijuana Law Challenged by Nebraska, Oklahoma; Supreme Court Ruling Sought in Legal Rift Between States.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

John Ingold of The Denver Post reports that “Nebraska and Oklahoma sue Colorado over marijuana legalization.”

Lori Pilger of The Lincoln Journal Star reports that “Nebraska, Oklahoma sue over Colorado marijuana law.”

The Omaha World-Herald reports that “Bruning files lawsuit over Colorado’s legalization of marijuana.”

The Oklahoman reports that “Oklahoma seeks to snuff out Colorado marijuana sales; State joins with Nebraska in asking U.S. Supreme Court to deem recreational sales unconstitutional.”

The Tulsa World reports that “Oklahoma AG Pruitt joins Nebraska suit against Colorado marijuana law.”

The Washington Times reports that “Oklahoma, Nebraska ask Supreme Court to overturn Colorado pot law.”

The Associated Press reports that “2 states challenge Colorado marijuana legalization.”

And Reuters reports that “Neighboring states challenge Colorado pot laws in top U.S. court.”

“Does judicial disagreement imply ambiguity?” Will Baude had this post yesterday at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”