Welcome to this week’s roundup of noteworthy appellate legal news. We’ll be reviewing key decisions, rulings and legal developments from all across the U.S. as featured on Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog, the pioneering weblog dedicated to appellate litigation.
- In a significant decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that making trial witnesses wear masks does not violate the Confrontation Right. The court considered masks as ‘necessary to further an important public policy’, according to a report by Peter Hayes of Bloomberg Law.
- Another notable judicial comment made this week came in the form of an essay by Mark Joseph Stern. He discussed a Trump-appointed judge’s stern ruling against Ron DeSantis for his alleged retaliation against a Democratic rival. The Jurisprudence essay is available online at Slate.
- Cliff Rieders’ essay in The Legal Intelligencer is a useful examination of the concept of ‘relativity’ in the law, in which he analyzes two recent cases, Hangey v. Husqvarna Professional Products and Dinardo v. Kohler.
- Mark Graber analysed presidential legal status in an intriguing blog post titled “Eureka Not: The President is an Officer of the United States Redux, Redux” at the “Balkinization” blog.
- Kyle Jahner of Bloomberg, in his report, sheds light on the 5th Circuit’s scrutiny over a bid to overturn Nickelback’s copyright win.
- Finally, there were developments concerning the case of Donna Adelson, who recently hired new lawyers to defend against charges of murdering Dan Markel. Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has more on this story.
For more comprehensive coverage of these stories and others in the world of appellate litigation, head over to the original weekly roundup at Above the Law.