Today in the News, 2.26.09

“In its legal briefs, Massey notes Benjamin voted against Massey in other cases. But ‘neither Massey not Justice Benjamin identifies a single case,’ the new Caperton brief states, ‘where Justice Benjamin has cast an outcome-determinative vote against Massey.’” The Charleston Gazette reports about Caperton’s reply brief filed in Caperton v. Massey Coal, set to be argued before the Supreme Court next Tuesday.

“81 percent believe judges should not decide whether they can be fair and impartial. Other judges should make decisions about whether or not such judges should step aside.” Also concerning Caperton, the Gazette reports about a study, conducted last week by Justice at Stake, in which the overwhelming majority of respondents stated they did not believe a judge could be impartial when hearing a case in which one party was a major campaign contributor. Justice at Stake is one of 28 amici represented by CAC in an amicus brief filed in support of the petitioner, Hugh Caperton.

“[A]ny thoughts you might have had of Justice David Souter fast-forwarding himself into the BlackBerry Age will have to wait.” Finally, in a high-tech story, BLT clears up speculation over whether the Supreme Court has officially joined Twitter.