The White House during Saturday's blizzard

After the 100-year storm that dumped more than two feet of snow on the region over the weekend, the federal government is closed today as folks in the region continue to dig out. And with another storm predicted to hit the area tomorrow, there may be more snow days to come this week.

But not even a blizzard stops the news, so here is a look at some legal headlines:

Speedier devices? The Food and Drug Administration has issued guidance on the use of a new statistical method the agency said could result in faster and less costly medical device clinical trials. (Lawyers USA)

Accelerating probe: Lawmakers in Congress have launched an investigation into the safety problems caused by gas pedals in certain Toyota models which led to a massive recall. (Lawyers USA)

He speaks! Justice Clarence Thomas talked about his RV, his favorite movies, hanging out with law students, First Amendment rights of corporations and more during a recent speech. He said when he was younger, “I was really a jerk, very unpleasant,” but now, he said, “I’m content with life.” (The BLT)

We’re still talking about this? At the risk of taking another swing at the dead horse that is the SCOTUS/POTUS/SOTU dustup, it seems that Justice Samuel Alito’s “not true” was directed at the Obama’s characterization of history. (AP)

White House officials are reportedly also preparing for the possible departure of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 76, who last year had her second cancer surgery since taking her seat on the High Court. Despite not missing a single day of oral arguments during treatment for pancreatic cancer, speculation about Ginsburg’s health has continued, spurred by a pair of recent hospitalizations and reports that she dozed off during the State of the Union address last week.

Stevens, 89, less than a year shy of overtaking Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes record to become the oldest justice to serve on the Court, has - like Ginsburg - remained vocal and sharp during oral arguments. But CBS News’ Jan Crawford recently reported that the justice seemed to stumble on his words while summarizing his dissent in the controversial case Citizens United v. FEC from the bench last month, causing more speculation about his future on the Court.

Sources close to Ginsburg threw water on the idea of the justice stepping down, pointing out, among other things, her active participation during oral arguments.

Obama’s short list of potential nominees include Solicitor General Elena Kagan, 7^th Circuit Judge Diane Wood, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, and Leah Ward Sears, former chief of the Georgia Supreme Court, ABC reports.

Meanwhile, while the city braces for yet another winter snowstorm, here is a wrap of the other legal news:

Some boosts in the budget: Despite President Barack Obama’s call for a freeze in discretionary spending, his fiscal 2011 budget calls for a boost in spending for a number of federal agencies and programs that, if adopted by Congress, will have an impact on the work of the nation’s attorneys. (Lawyers USA) (Sub req’d)

Defending the handgun ban: A D.C.-based attorney will argue the Chicago Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court, urging the justices to uphold the city’s strict gun ban. (The National Law Journal) (Sub req’d)

Black history and SCOTUS: In honor of Black History Month, SCOTUSblog is running a series of essays examining race and the Supreme Court. (SCOTUSblog)

Toyota in hot seat: Members of Congress are demanding more answers from Toyota officials concerning problems in 5.6 million of its vehicles which spurred a massive recall operation.(Detroit Free Press)

Main Justice reports that lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center filed the lawsuit on behalf of Pastors Levon Yuille, Rene Ouellette and James Combs as well as Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan.

The complaint alleges that the law, passed to stop bias-motivated crimes against gay, lesbian bisexual and transgendered individuals, violates the First, Fifth and Tenth Amendments, as well as the Commerce Clause. It lists Attorney General Eric Holder as the defendant, and is the first constitutional challenge to the new hate crimes law’s provisions.

“[T]he Hate Crimes Act .. promotes [an] Orwellian concept: thought crimes,” the complaint states. “[It] criminalizes certain ideas, beliefs, and opinions, and the involvement of such ideas, beliefs, and opinions in a crime will make the crime deserving of federal prosecution. Consequently, government officials, including Defendant, are claiming the power to decide which thoughts are criminal under federal law and which are not. [The] Hate Crimes Act is intended to send a government endorsed message to those persons who oppose the homosexual agenda on the basis of deeply held religious beliefs, such as Plaintiffs, that their religious beliefs are disfavored and the equivalent of racist beliefs.”

A Justice Department spokesman told Main Justice that the government would “defend these vital protections in court.”

HT: ABA Law Journal

As you know, the normally five-member board has operated with only two members for more than two years. And the validity of opinions the Board has issued since January 2008 are now in question, and the Supreme Court is set to decide if the rulings were made by a properly constituted quorum.

President Bush’s nominees to fill the vacancies stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate. And now Becker’s nomination is facing strong opposition by Republicans and business groups who say the former attorney for the Service Employees International Union and AFL-CIO would usher in anti-business policies.

As Becker appeared at a hearing held on his nomination yesterday - the first time in 17 years that a hearing has been called to vet a NLRB nominee - The U.S. Chamber of Commerce blasted Senate Democrats, accusing them of trying to jam Becker’s nomination through before the Senate’s newest Republican, Sen.-elect Scott Brown, is seated.

“For the first time since 1993, the Chamber is taking the unusual step of opposing a nominee to the NLRB,” said a statement from Randel K. Johnson, the Chamber’s vice president for Labor, Immigration, and Employee Benefits. “It would be an egregious mistake and would set a dangerous precedent for the Senate to push this nomination through during a lame-duck period. The NLRB has the ability to unduly increase union power and leverage it without intervention by Congress. Confirming Becker will tilt the balance in labor law dramatically in favor of union special interests.”

Sen. Tom Harkin, the Democratic chairman of the Senate committee vetting Becker’s nomination, said Democrats have given GOP members what they want.

“We are here, today, to take the rather unusual step of holding a hearing on a nominee for the National Labor Relations Board,” Harkin said at the hearing.  “It has not been the standard practice of this Committee to hold hearings on NLRB nominations…However, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have requested a hearing.  And while I am reluctant to further prolong the consideration of an obviously well-qualified nominee, I was willing to accommodate that request because I think the work of the NLRB is tremendously important and deserves this Committee’s attention.”

But Republicans including Sen. John McCain grilled Becker over issues such as card check elections and how Becker would handle cases involving the unions he worked for in the past.

Becker said he would rule fairly and recuse himself when necessary. “I will abide, Sen. McCain, with the terms of that pledge scrupulously, and as I indicated, if any other matters come up outside of the scope of that pledge where any party might think that I might not be impartial, I will consider the matter…. and if necessary recuse myself from those cases,” he said.

“That’s not good enough,” McCain replied.

~Justice Clarence Thomas, speaking at Stetson Law School, on why he chose not to attend the State of the Union address.

~ Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, giving the keynote address at a Georgetown Law discussion on the effect of the Supreme Court decisions Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co.

(Earlier, O’Connor joked: “I step away for a couple of years and there’s no telling what’s going to happen!”)

Before lawmakers and White House officials went on the Sunday talk shows to blast each other, President Barack Obama himself tussled with GOP lawmakers in a rare, face-to-face televised confrontation.

President Obama had been invited to a Republican gathering in Baltimore in an effort to show that both parties were ready to cooperate. But, the Associated Press reports, it didn’t turn out that way. Instead, Obama and GOP members including House Republican leader John Boehner exchanged point-by-point barbs with one another.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are still steaming over Justice Samuel Alito’s visible dismay during President Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said Alito’s behavior “crossed the line,” and accused Alito and Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. of misleading the Senate during their confirmation hearings.

“You bet they misled,” Durbin told Politico, saying the decision in Citizens United v. FEC contradicted the justices promise to uphold precedent. The ruling overturned a 2003 decision with upheld portions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that Citizens United struck down.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein accused Roberts of judicial activism, telling Politico: “He’s not somebody who just measures balls and strikes. It’s been the most activist court that I’ve seen in my 17 years in the committee.”

But Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl disagreed. “I really believe that an injustice was done to the First Amendment and political speech in the earlier decision,” Kyl said. “I don’t think that’s activism.”

In other news:

Budget day! Obama releases his $3.8 trillion budget today. (Washington Post)

Feds issue Chinese drywall guidance: A group of federal agencies has issued guidelines designed to help homeowners identify potentially problematic drywall in their homes. (Lawyers USA)

Why Briscoe went bust: It looked like a potential blockbuster. But the forensic lab testimony case that started out with a roar ended Monday with a whimper. So what happened? (Lawyers USA)

Taking some heat off corporations? The U.S. Sentencing Commission has proposed reducing the criminal penalties corporations may face for their employees’ actions. (WSJ’s Law Blog)

Members of Senate blasted the Justice Department over decisions the department has made in two high-profile terrorism trials.

Sen. Lamar Alexander

Sen. Lamar Alexander took to the Sunday morning talk show airwaves to call for the resignation of Attorney General Eric Holder for allowing suspected underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to be given a Miranda warning.

Abdulmutallab after speaking for almost an hour, was sedated to receive medical treatment. When he awoke, he no longer wanted to talk, and was then Mirandized. The Los Angeles Times reports that a number of other agencies - the FBI, State Department and CIA - authorized the Miranda warning.

Alexander said Holder needs to explain himself to lawmakers/

“(Holder’s) doing a better job of interrogating CIA employees than he is of interrogating terrorists, and he’s not making a distinction between enemy combatants and terrorists flying into Detroit trying to blow up planes and American citizens who are committing a crime,” Alexander said on “Fox News Sunday,” reports The Hill. “He needs to go to Congress and say I made that decision, and here’s why. And based on that perhaps he should step down.”

White House advisor Davd Axelrod

Meanwhile, the Justice Department is still facing head from Republicans on the Hill for the decision to hold the Sept. 11 terror attack trial in a lower Manhattan civilian court - and now the Obama administration is considering changing the venue after New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg expressed concern about the costs and security issues of holding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial in lower Manhattan. Bloomberg had initially supported the decision.

No decision has been made on where the trial may be held, but White House officials shot back at GOP lawmakers who criticized the administration for not trying the case in a military tribunal. David Axelrod, the senior adviser to President Obama, pointed out on “Meet the Press” that suspects including “shoe bomber” Richard Reid were tried in civilian courts under President George W. Bush.

“Now we have a Democratic president and suddenly we hear these protests,” Axelrod said. “What has changed between now and then that would cause people to reverse positions?”

Bankruptcy boost: A bill that would increase the number of federal bankruptcy judges to handle the recent surge of personal and corporate bankruptcies has advanced in the House. (Lawyers USA)

Beyond Ledbetter: Lawmakers marking the one-year anniversary of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act being signed by President Barack Obama said more work needs to be done - and urged passage of another law that would further boost worker protections. (Lawyers USA)

High Court to take on airport privacy? Will the Supreme Court tackle the issue of those controversial full-body scanners at the nation’s airports? (UPI)

Change of venue? The Justice Department, facing mounting pressure from New York politicians, is exploring contingency sites for the trial of alleged terrorist conspirators. (New York Times)

Reunited, and equal: Descendants of the parties in Plessy v. Ferguson reunited for a discussion about that case in Topeka.

Haliburton asks SCOTUS to drop case: Halliburton Co. is asking the Supreme Court to block a Texas woman’s lawsuit alleging she was raped by military contractor co-workers in Iraq. (ABC News)

But Vice President Joe Biden took to the airways this morning to defend the president’s remarks about the ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, calling the ruling, which removed limits on corporate spending in federal election campaigns, “the last thing we need.”

“The president didn’t question the integrity of the court. He questioned the judgment of it,” Biden said on “Good Morning America” this morning, according to the AP. “A lot of these multinational corporations are owned as much by foreign interests as they are by domestic interests.”

“I think it’s an outrageous decision,” Biden said later. “Not outrageous in the fact that these guys are bad guys, but outrageous in the way you read the Constitution [to allow] excessive amounts of money be able to influence the outcome of elections.”

He echoed Obama’s call for a congressional remedy. “I think it was dead wrong and we have to correct it,” said Biden.