“Supreme Court Blocks North Carolina From Restoring Strict Voting Law”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court won’t let North Carolina use strict voting law.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court denies North Carolina appeal to enforce its voter ID rules.”
Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Blocks Stricter Voting Rules in North Carolina; A deadlocked court turns back request to revive rules blocked by lower court.”
Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court rejects bid to reinstate North Carolina voting limits.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. High Court Won’t Revive North Carolina Voter-ID Law.”
Ariane de Vogue and Dan Berman of CNN.com report that “Supreme Court won’t reinstate North Carolina voter ID law.”
Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Denies North Carolina’s Plea To Restore Swath Of Voting Restrictions; The state won’t be able to enforce them come Election Day.”
And at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Lyle Denniston has a post titled “North Carolina limits on voting remain on hold.”
“Inflatable Rat Case Maybe Moot; Posner Lashes Out”: Nicholas Datlowe of Bloomberg BNA has this report.
“US court upholds ban on gun sales to marijuana card holders”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal government ban on the sale of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“US high court refuses to reinstate North Carolina voter ID”: The Associated Press has this report.
And Rick Hasen — en route to Philadelphia, where a certain two law bloggers will be meeting for dinner tomorrow evening — has a post at his “Election Law Blog” titled “#SCOTUS 4-4 Tie in NC Voting Case Leaves Lower Court Ruling in Place and Shows Us Power of Appeals Courts Post-Scalia.”
You can view today’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.
“U.S. court voids $655 mln verdict against PLO over Israel attacks”: Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “US appeals court tosses out $654 million verdict against PLO.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
“Amtrak gets partial victory in U.S. appeal over Sandy insurance”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report on a non-precedential decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.
“Republicans file contempt motion against McAuliffe over felon rights restoration”: Graham Moomaw of The Richmond Times-Dispatch has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “GOP seeks to block McAuliffe’s latest felon voting effort.”
“We Need Abortion Laws Based on Science”: Ushma D. Upadhyay has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.
In the September 2016 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Supreme Court divided over warrants discovered in illegal stops.”
And David L. Hudson Jr. has an article headlined “New Mexico high court urges judges to be discreet on social media.”
“Gavin Grimm just wanted to use the bathroom; He didn’t think the nation would debate it”: Moriah Balingit has this front page article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.
“Edward Snowden’s Long, Strange Journey to Hollywood: Oliver Stone wanted a hit — and the chance to put America’s most iconic dissident onscreen; The subject wanted veto power; The Russian lawyer wanted someone to option the novel he’d written; The American lawyer just wanted the whole insane project to go away; Somehow a film got made.” Irina Aleksander will have this article in this upcoming Sunday’s edition of The New York Times Magazine.
“North Carolina Republicans Accused of Dodging Order to Fix Election Rules”: Michael Wines has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.
“Grassley hints at Supreme Court confirmation hearing in lame duck”: Nolan D. McCaskill of Politico.com has this report.
And Reuters reports that “Senator Grassley could be persuaded to hold hearing on Garland.”
“A Bad Ruling for Those Who Want to Throttle AT&T”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.
“The Court after Scalia: Standing at the crossroads on voting rights.” Law professor Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Court: Texas death row inmate may have faked mental illness.” The Associated Press has this report on an unpublished per curiam opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday.
“Justice Department Gave Supreme Court Incorrect Data in Immigration Case; Department won the 2003 case after understating the time certain immigrants spend in detention without bail”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.
“New York Court Expands Definition of Parenthood”: Alan Feuer of The New York Times has this report.
And The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: Gays can seek parental rights for nonbiological kids.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Court of Appeals of New York — that state’s highest court — at this link.
“Constitution Check: Might the courts end the Senate impasse on Garland?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.
“Alleged al Qaeda bomber loses pretrial challenge”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court refuses to halt trial in USS Cole attack.”
You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.
“Court lets suit against maker of blood thinner be tried in SF”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has an article that begins, “Heart patients who say the anticlotting drug Plavix has caused internal bleeding, heart attacks and even deaths can sue manufacturer Bristol-Myers in San Francisco, even though the company and most of the plaintiffs are based in other states, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday.”
You can access yesterday’s 4-to-3 ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.
“Court denies appeal in case about Native Hawaiian election”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.
“Applying Johnson, we join the increasing majority of our sister circuits in holding that the residual clause in [Sentencing Guidelines section] 4B1.2(a)(2) is unconstitutionally vague.” So held a majority of the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in a decision issued yesterday.
“The Honorable Merrick Garland addresses HLS Class of 2019”: Harvard Law School has posted the video of this recent event on YouTube at this link.
And Peter DeMarco of the Harvard Gazette has a report on the event titled “The makings of Merrick Garland: Supreme Court nominee tells new law students it doesn’t take wizardry to thrive, just ‘good choices’”
“Founders Meet Brand X”: David Feder has this post at the “Fed Soc Blog.”
“Strange Goings On in 7th Circuit En Banc WI Voter ID Case: A 9th Vote Appears.” Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law Blog.”
You can view the amended en banc per curiam decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday at this link.
“Suit over AT&T iPhone data plans dismissed”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.
Mike Snider of USA Today reports that “Federal court dismisses AT&T throttling case.”
The Associated Press reports that “Court dismisses data speed reduction suit against AT&T.”
And Reuters reports that “U.S. appeals court dismisses AT&T data throttling lawsuit.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Court denies asylum to 28 detained Latin American mothers”: The Associated Press has this report.
And at “Just Security,” Steve Vladeck has a post titled “Third Circuit Holds Suspension Clause Does Not Apply to Non-Citizens Physically (But Not Lawfully) Present in the United States.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link.
Programming note: After a thoroughly enjoyable if all-too-brief visit to Portland, Maine — featuring back-to-back extra-inning Portland Sea Dogs games — today my vacation week transitions closer to home.
This week, after watching the Philadelphia Phillies host the Washington Nationals joined by the same DC-based baseball superfan with whom I attended a Nationals game in DC last Wednesday evening, I will be heading to Margate, New Jersey for a few days.
Because I will be traveling for most of the day today, additional posts will appear here tonight. In the interim, additional appellate-related retweets may appear on this blog’s Twitter feed.
“Reject ugly political attacks in Kansas and retain Supreme Court justices”: The Kansas City Star has an editorial that begins, “A few days ago Kansas House Republicans called on voters to oust four of the five state Supreme Court justices standing for retention later this year.”
“Selfies in voting booths: Depending on where you live, they may be illegal; A New Hampshire law says selfie ban is needed to curtail vote buying and coercion.” David Kravets of Ars Technica has this report.
“A very different court”: Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky has this analysis in the August 2016 issue of the California Bar Journal.
“7th Circuit Refuses En Banc in Both WI Voter ID Cases; No More Changes Unless #SCOTUS Intervenes”: Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law Blog.”
Ariane de Vogue of CNN.com reports that “Court declines to hear appeal on Wisconsin voter ID law before election.”
And Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Wisconsin Gets To Enforce Restrictive Voter ID Law, With One Big Twist; An appeals court rejected a softening device that would’ve made it easier for people without a voter card.”
You can access Friday’s en banc per curiam opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link.
“U.S. Court Rules Infringement Suit by Trader Joe’s Can Proceed Against Pirate Joe’s”: Kenneth R. Rosen of The New York Times has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “Court sides with Trader Joe’s in suit over alleged knockoff.”
You can access Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Reversal of death sentence reflects leftward tilt of California Supreme Court”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this report on a 4-to-3 ruling that the Supreme Court of California issued on Monday.
