“Electing Pennsylvania Supreme Court Judges: Justice for Sale?” The video of this past Monday’s broadcast of The American Law Journal, on which I served as an in-studio guest, is now available online via YouTube at this link.

The other in-studio guests were retired U.S. District Judge Edward N. Cahn (E.D. Pa.) and Hank Grezlak, editor-in-chief of The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

“Attorney General’s office releases emails of Supreme Court Justice Eakin”: Charles Thompson of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has this news update. Thompson also reports that “Kathleen Kane breaks with her deputy on Pa. Supreme Court Justice Eakin’s emails.”

Karen Langley of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a news update headlined “AG Kane’s office releases to reporters examples of justice’s ‘offensive’ emails.”

Craig R. McCoy and Maria Panaritis of The Philadelphia Inquirer have a news update headlined “Kane releases offensive emails.”

Brad Bumsted of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has a news update headlined “Kane blames First Deputy Beemer for review of justice’s emails.”

Tuesday’s edition of The Reading (Pa.) Eagle contained an editorial titled “Justice’s continued service could taint high court cases.”

In today’s edition of The Reading Eagle, columnist Liam Migdail-Smith has an op-ed titled “It’s too late to regret it after you said it.”

And in today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, columnist Jennifer Graham has an op-ed titled “Whatever happened to modesty? When porn gets soft-pedaled as ‘mild,’ the Halloween tramp won’t be far behind.”

“For Supreme Court — Christine Donohue, Judith Olson and David Wecht”: The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has posted online this editorial today.

And this past Sunday’s edition of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review contained an editorial titled “For Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Elect Michael George, Judy Olson & David Wecht,”

“How Supreme Court Justices Check for Conflicts of Interest”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this interesting report today (pass-through link via Twitter).

“Supreme Court battle on assault weapons looms; But do bans do anything? A federal court upheld assault weapons bans in New York and Connecticut; But there’s debate over what the laws actually accomplish.” Harry Bruinius of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“Prosecuting Online Threats After Elonis”: Michael Pierce has this essay at Northwestern University Law Review Online.

“The false promise of ‘judicial restraint’ in America”: In today’s edition of The Washington Post, columnist George F. Will has an op-ed that begins, “A supremely important presidential issue is being generally neglected because Democrats have nothing interesting to say about it and Republicans differ among themselves about it.”

In response today at National Review’s “Bench Memos” blog, Ed Whelan has a post titled “George Will’s Mistaken Critique of Judicial Restraint.”

“Oral Argument in Hurst v. Florida: Old Divisions, Fraying Alliances?” Jonathan Keim had this post yesterday at National Review’s “Bench Memos” blog.

“The Supreme Court vs. Contract Law”: Greg Klass has this post at the “New Private Law” blog.

“Constitution Check: Are driver’s licenses the answer to voter ID laws?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Gun Laws Upheld, But It’s Complicated”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.

“The secret US prisons you’ve never heard of before: Investigative journalist Will Potter is the only reporter who has been inside a Communications Management Unit, or CMU, within a US prison.” Via TED Talks at this link. Additional information can be accessed here.

“The Decline of the Virginia (and American) Death Penalty”: Law professor Brandon L. Garrett has posted this article online at SSRN.

“The Soft Evidence Behind the Hard Rhetoric of ‘Deterrence'”: Emily Bazelon will have this essay discussing Foster v. Chatman in this upcoming Sunday’s issue of The New York Times Magazine.

“Penn. student loan agency not immune from whistleblower suit — 4th Circuit”: Reuters has this report.

Inside Higher Ed has a post titled “Suing Student Loan Servicers: In a decision hailed by consumer advocates, a federal appeals court rules that a major student loan agency is not immune from lawsuits.”

And at the “Grade Point” blog of The Washington Post, Danielle Douglas-Gabriel has an entry titled “The student loan scandal that just won’t die.”

You can access yesterday’s 72-page ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

Paul D. Clement argued the appeal on behalf of PHEAA, while Bert W. Rein argued the appeal on behalf of the relator-plaintiff. You can access the Fourth Circuit oral argument via this link (27.7 MB mp3 audio file).