“Judges’ procedural questions hint at skepticism on California death penalty ban”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this report.
Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Federal judges hint they’ll bow out of challenge to death penalty.”
Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reports that “California death penalty under court microscope.”
In Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times, Erik Eckholm will have an article headlined “California Defends Its Review Process in Appeal to Preserve Death Penalty.”
Reuters reports that “Appeals court looks reluctant to overturn California death penalty.”
And The Associated Press reports that “Court considers challenge to California death penalty.”
You can view the video of today’s oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Supreme Court Says Kentucky Clerk Must Let Gay Couples Marry”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Sandhya Somashekhar and Robert Barnes of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court rejects county official’s request in gay-marriage case.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has an article headlined “Kentucky clerk who refused to issue gay marriage licenses is out of luck: Supreme Court rejects her case.”
Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court says Kentucky clerk can’t deny same-sex marriage licenses.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Clerk Must Issue Gay-Marriage Licenses After High Court Rebuff.”
Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court denies Kentucky clerk request on gay marriage licenses.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Kentucky clerk loses on same-sex marriage plea.”
“Supreme Court rules against clerk in gay marriage case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against a Kentucky county clerk who says her Christian faith should exempt her from having to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.”
You can access this evening’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.
And in related coverage, The Louisville Courier-Journal has a news update headlined “Rowan clerk could face criminal prosecution.”
“In the Execution Business, Missouri Is Surging; Defense lawyers call it a crisis; the state says it’s just doing its job”: Maurice Chammah has this article online today at The Marshall Project.
“US Supreme Court: Ex-Virginia gov to remain free for now.” The Associated Press has this report.
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Former governor to remain free during appeal.”
You can access today’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.
“[T]he government’s continued authorization of the [“Big Mountain Jesus”] statue on federal land does not violate the Establishment Clause.” So holds the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a non-precedential ruling issued today (via “Mirror of Justice“).
“U.S. appeals court rules for Argentine central bank in bond case”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report.
And Bloomberg News reports that “Argentine Central Bank Assets Can’t Be Seized by Bondholders.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
“Court to rule if California death penalty is cruel, unusual”: The Associated Press has this report.
The death penalty in early America: In the September 7, 2015 issue of The New Yorker, Stacy Schiff has an “Annals of Terror” article titled “The Witches of Salem: In 1692, the Massachusetts Bay Colony executed fourteen women, five men, and two dogs for witchcraft.”
Schiff’s new book — “The Witches: Salem, 1692” — is scheduled for publication on October 27, 2015.
“Marshall Rothstein muses on nine years in Canada’s Supreme Court; ‘I do not view the court as being any opposition to the government,’ retiring judge tells the Star; ‘We’re just trying to do our job'”: Tonda MacCharles has this front page article in today’s edition of The Toronto Star.
“Supreme Court’s ‘Long Conference’: Where Appeals ‘Go to Die.'” Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.
Liptak’s report discusses, among other things, an article recently posted online at SSRN titled “Seasonal Affective Disorder: Clerk Training and the Success of Supreme Court Certiorari Petitions.”
“Off Their Front Porch: Protesters Have No Free-Speech Rights On Supreme Court Plaza; An appellate court ruled the Constitution doesn’t apply with equal force on the high court’s plaza.” Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post has this report today.
“Kentucky clerk who opposes same-sex marriage turns to Supreme Court for help”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.
“ELB Podcast Episode 3: Larry Lessig: Bold Campaign Reformer or Don Quixote?” Rick Hasen has this post today at his “Election Law Blog.”
And if you missed episode two of the ELB Podcast, it was titled “Floyd Abrams, Citizens United, Free Speech, and the Supreme Court.”
“West Point professor calls on US military to target legal critics of war on terror; US military academy official William Bradford argues that attacks on scholars’ home offices and media outlets — along with Islamic holy sites — are legitimate”: Spencer Ackerman of The Guardian (UK) has this report.
You can view the article as published in the National Security Law Journal (whose home page now includes an apology for publishing the article) at this link.
“The Rehabilitationists: How a small band of determined legal academics set out to persuade the Supreme Court to undo the New Deal — and have almost won.” Brian Beutler has this article online at The New Republic.
“California Death Penalty, Struck Down Over Delays, Faces Next Test”: Erik Eckholm will have this article in Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.
The three judges assigned to hear and decide the case being argued Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit are Circuit Judges Susan P. Graber, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, and Paul J. Watford.
“Protesters have no free-speech rights on Supreme Court’s front porch”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.
“Demonstrators Can’t Use Supreme Court’s Outdoor Plaza, Appeals Court Says”: Jess Bravin has this post at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog.”
“A misleading story about Justice Thomas”: Orin Kerr has this post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”
“Gay couple turned away 3rd time by Rowan clerk”: The Louisville Courier-Journal has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “Clerk asks US Supreme Court to intervene in marriage case.”
“D.C. appeals court lifts injunction against NSA’s bulk-collection program”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
James Risen of The New York Times has a news update headlined “N.S.A. Phone Data Collection Backed by Appeals Court.”
The Washington Post reports that “A D.C. appeals court has lifted an injunction against the NSA phone call records program.”
Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Court upholds NSA sweep of phone records.”
Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reports that “Appeals court backs NSA phone-snooping, overturns Klayman victory.”
And at “Just Security,” Steve Vladeck had a post titled “Better Never Than Late? The D.C. Circuit’s Problematic Standing Holding in Klayman.”
“Sports Gambling Law Is Unfair to New Jersey”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg News.
“Appeals court upholds protest ban on Supreme Court plaza”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court says Supreme Court can ban protests on plaza.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.
“Appeals court reverses ruling that found NSA program illegal”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.
In other coverage, Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. court rules for government over NSA metadata collection program.”
And Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. Appeals Court Sends NSA Collection Challenge Back to Judge.”
“Ohio’s nonsensical attack on abortion rights”: This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.
“Indiana justices hear challenge to BMV’s license plate rules; State Supreme Court must decide whether agency’s process on approving messages on personalized plates is unconstitutional or a necessary governmental right”: The Indianapolis Star has a news update that begins, “The Indiana Supreme Court justices must decide whether the letters and numbers on a personalized license plate is a form of government speech that should be controlled, or a person’s speech that should be protected by the First Amendment.”
“A Supreme Court Justice of Few Words, Many of Them Other People’s”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Friday’s edition of The New York Times discussing, among other things, a paper by Adam Feldman titled “A Brief Assessment of Supreme Court Opinion Language.”
“Arkansas’s Mixed Religious Messages”: Online at Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman has an essay that begins, “Arkansas, which is poised to erect a new Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of its state capitol, has just rejected a request by a Hindu group to erect a statue of the god Hanuman there.”
“Record Breaking Term for Amicus Curiae in Supreme Court Reflects New Norm”: Anthony J. Franze and R. Reeves Anderson recently had this essay in The National Law Journal.
“New SCOTUS briefs: 2nd Circuit didn’t change insider trading law in Newman case.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.
“Senate Leaders on Target to Break Obstruction Record”: Judith E. Schaeffer has this judicial vacancy-related blog entry online at The Huffington Post.
Bryan Garner interviews Justice Elena Kagan about legal writing: You can access the video segments via this link (h/t Tony Mauro).
Ninth Circuit rejects constitutional challenge to federal statute criminalizing sexual abuse that occurs in state or local jails where federal detainees are held pursuant to a contract with a federal agency: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“[D]efense counsel June K. Ghezzi was subsequently ordered to produce a discovery training video dealing with the impropriety of form objections, witness coaching, and excessive interruptions and to distribute the video to most of the attorneys [at Jones Day].” Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a decision overturning that sanction.
