The new heading seems reasonably accurate and much more clear.
"9th Circuit Appeals Court" does not add useful information (at least not enough to warrant inclusion in the heading) and "4th amendment" doesn't mean anything at all to those of us who are not Americans.
9th Circuit adds a ton of useful information: its decisions are only binding in the 9th circuit (California, etc). Also, it's the most overturned Circuit at the Supreme Court level by a large margin.
> Also, it's the most overturned Circuit at the Supreme Court level by a large margin.
The stat pack for the previous term appears to disagree with you. (For anyone not familiar with their terminology, note that OT 2011 refers to the period between October 4, 2011 and September 30, 2012.)
I'm not saying that that the 9th Circuit isn't useful information per se. But this thread is about what belongs in this particular headline. Just because it's interesting information (to that tiny sector of the readership that follows US law closely enough to know their 9th Circuits from their 10th Circuits) doesn't necessarily mean that information has to live in the headline. The crux of the story is that the courts have finally upheld the idea of privacy at the border. That's the news.
'"9th Circuit Appeals Court" does not add useful information'
"9th circuit appeals court" is probably the most important part of the article. It tells me the Supreme Court didn't decide this -- so nothing has changed for 41 of the 50 states.
"9th Circuit Appeals Court" does not add useful information (at least not enough to warrant inclusion in the heading) and "4th amendment" doesn't mean anything at all to those of us who are not Americans.