At Crime & Consequences, Kent Scheidegger declares, after reading the transcript in Musladin, that “Ginsburg Gets It.”
At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman reflects on the oral argument in Cunningham. Doug also had an earlier post about the argument featuring the thoughts of Professor Mark Osler.
At Volokh, Orin Kerr highlights a case dealing with searches of electronic material; he believes there is “a decent chance that this case would be the first computer search and seizure case to get to the Supreme Court.”
Sandy Levinson of Balkinization shares his thoughts about the criticism that Linda Greenhouse has gotten over her remarks at Radcliffe College (Linda briefly discussed the controversy in our podcast interview with her here).
Dave Fagundes of Prawfsblawg discusses an interesting context for applying Campbell v. Acuff-Rose, a copyright-related Supreme Court case: the “Nietzsche Family Circus,” which randomly pairs quotes from the German philosopher with Family Circus cartoons.
Finally, Peter Lattman of the WSJ Law Blog has a dispatch from the Second Circuit, where Sandra Day O’Connor was invited to hear five cases as a member of a three-judge panel that also included Judge John Walker and Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY