The unusual request is based on the failure of anyone involved in the case — lawyers on both sides as well as the justices — to take account of a change in federal law in 2006 that authorizes the death penalty for members of the military who are convicted of child rape.

The court almost never grants such requests, but lawyers for Louisiana said their situation was different because the 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy relied in part on what Kennedy called a "national consensus" against executing convicted rapists.

The ruling on June 25 drew harsh criticism from politicians in Louisiana and other states where executing those who rape children was authorized or under consideration. Presidential contenders John McCain and Barack Obama also said they disagreed with the outcome of the case.

But only in the days following the decision did anyone point out that Congress changed the law and that President Bush signed an executive order in September 2007 that implemented the change. It was first discussed on a military law blog.

One of her first stops after being released from prison was the Jefferson County Voter Registrar's Office. But she was told she was a convicted felon and couldn't vote.

"I couldn't believe it," Pruitt said. "They continued to give me numbers to call. It was very much demeaning."

Now she has gone to court to try to get her right to vote restored.

On Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in Montgomery Circuit Court on behalf of Pruitt and two other ex-felons seeking restoration of their voting rights. The lawsuit claims Alabama law is unclear on the subject, citing a bill passed by the Legislature in 2003 that says felons can vote unless convicted on "crimes of moral turpitude," but never defines those crimes.

The Legislature adopted a list of 15 crimes, including murder, treason and some sex crimes, that would exempt a person from having their voting rights restored. But the lawsuit says it's up to the state's voter registrars and the attorney general to decide in other cases if a person's rights can be restored.

The Seoul Western District Court said its appellate court affirmed its sentence against Shin Jeong-ah for using the fake degree to become an art history professor at a Seoul university and win financial sponsorship for a museum where she worked. The court handed down the first ruling in March.

Shin has seven days to appeal, according to court spokesman Kim Myung-su.

Seoul's Dongguk University also filed a suit against Yale in March seeking at least $50 million in damages, saying the American university wrongly confirmed that Shin earned a degree. Yale has called the matter an administrative error and apologized to Dongguk.

Shin made headlines last year when the fake degree scandal led to revelations that she had a romantic relationship with former presidential aide Byeon Yang-kyoon, who allegedly used his influence to help her get hired at Dongguk.

Byeon resigned as an aide to former President Roh Moo-hyun before being convicted of exercising his influence to provide state tax benefits to a Buddhist temple founded by a former Dongguk official who helped hire Shin as a professor.

In March, the district court handed Byeon a suspended one-year jail term and ordered him to conduct 160 hours of community service.

The three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Federal Communications Commission "acted arbitrarily and capriciously" in issuing the fine for the fleeting image of nudity.

The 90 million people watching the Super Bowl, many of them children, heard Justin Timberlake sing, "Gonna have you naked by the end of this song," as he reached for Jackson's bustier.

The court found that the FCC deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so "pervasive as to amount to 'shock treatment' for the audience."

"Like any agency, the FCC may change its policies without judicial second-guessing," the court said. "But it cannot change a well-established course of action without supplying notice of and a reasoned explanation for its policy departure."

The 3rd Circuit judges — Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica, Judge Marjorie O. Rendell and Judge Julio M. Fuentes — also ruled that the FCC deviated from its long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency.

Chen Shui-bian entered the Taipei District Court building as police barred dozens of supporters and opponents from approaching him. But CTI Cable News reported that an elderly man managed to kick the former president before being taken away by two policemen.

Although Chen left the presidency in May, many Taiwan still revile him for alleged corruption and pro-independence policies.

Chen's Democratic Progressive Party lost the presidential election to the Nationalist Party's Ma Ying-jeou.

The libel suit was filed by retired Nationalist Admiral Lei Hsueh-ming, who is demanding $66 million in compensation.

Chen told reporters in 2005 that Lei and several other officials together took $20 million in bribes in a US$2.7 billion deal to buy six French-made frigates.

The deal turned into a scandal in 1993 following the death of a Taiwanese navy captain who was widely believed to have been killed because he was about to blow the whistle on colleagues who allegedly took kickbacks.

"The Marriage Protection Act" otherwise known as Proposition 8 goes to the California voters in November 2008. But what exactly is this proposition? It would amend the California Constitution to include the phrase "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California."

In May 2008 the California Supreme Court ruled banning same-sex marriage unconstitutional thus allowing gay and lesbians to marry as early as June 17, 2008. Many did and many more are to follow, reveling in the fact that the gay and lesbian individuals are now equals in the state for marriage. But that was short lived for as soon as that ruling was past those who oppose, filed for a measure to be placed on the ballot to amend the constitution.

It is believed that those who wish to have the constitution amended convoluted the truth when they obtain the requested signatures to have the proposition placed on the November ballot, thus ensuring that it would stay. The California Supreme Court denied a motion to have the proposition stricken from the ballot as they would not hear same, thus California gets to vote on same.

Churches of various denominations as well as non-denomination support the change to the California constitution stating that they are doing same to "protect one of our nation's most sacred institutions." This is the second attempt to change the constitution to prohibit same sex marriage and supporters are confident that it will pass based on a random polling. For all the rhetoric that is being said, individuals hide behind their religious texts to support their cause who no real basis for having the constitution amended. Those who oppose spend massive amounts of money in trying to force their will on others. This is not right; there are far more important issues to address such as the war in Iraq, the economy and those who really do need help.