“Court backs White House on terror suspects”: Patti Waldmeir has this article in Tuesday’s edition of Financial Times.

“High Court Will Not Review Padilla Case; ‘Enemy Combatant’ Ruling Left Intact”: Charles Lane will have this article Tuesday in The Washington Post.

“When You Wish Upon a Scar: Zacarias Moussaoui finally makes his dreams come true.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Supreme Court Won’t Hear Padilla Detainee Case” (featuring Nina Totenberg) and “Jury Decides Moussaoui Is Eligible for Execution.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

Tomorrow morning, the U.S. Senate will vote to confirm Michael A. Chagares to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit: He will fill the vacancy created when Michael Chertoff left that court. The confirmation will have occurred rapidly by modern standards.

“Justice Ginsburg to speak Friday at UNL”: The Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star contains this article today. Additional information is available at this link.

“Pryor: Faith helps his role as judge; UA conference seeks common ground on religious issues.” This article appears today in The Crimson White.

“Bush team wins on power to detain, for now; The Supreme Court opted not to hear an appeal by Jose Padilla challenging his three-year detention”: Warren Richey will have this article Tuesday in The Christian Science Monitor.

And Stephen Henderson of Knight Ridder Newspapers reports that “Justices refuse to weigh in on Padilla case.”

“Doctor flies into South Dakota to perform abortions”: CNN.com provides this report.

“High Court to Consider Deportation Cases”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“The ‘Enemy’ Delivers Himself”: CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen has this essay on today’s verdict in the Zacarias Moussaoui case.

“The settlement agreement resolves claims against the Jenkens & Gilchrist Defendants arising out of tax strategies allegedly devised by them and Deutsche Bank, and allegedly marketed by co-defendant BDO Seidman, L.L.P.” In a lengthy opinion dated last Friday but posted online today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upholds in most respects a class-wide settlement with defendant law firm Jenkens & Gilchrist and three of its attorneys in a class-action lawsuit alleging improper and fraudulent tax counseling.

“We conclude that Crawford announced a new rule not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review”: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit today issued this opinion considering the applicability of the U.S. Supreme Court‘s ruling in Crawford v. Washington (2004) on habeas review where the defendant’s conviction was final when the decision in Crawford issued.

“Jury Finds Moussaoui Eligible for Execution”: The Washington Post provides this news update.

BREAKING NEWS — “Moussaoui Found Elegible for Death Penalty”: The Associated Press provides this report.

Access online the Zacarias Moussaoui special verdict form: It is available here.

“High Court Refuses to Hear Padilla Appeal”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court Rejects Padilla Appeal.”

“Slate’s Jurisprudence: High Court Dodges Padilla.” This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

BREAKING NEWS — “Moussaoui Jury Reaches Verdict”: The Associated Press provides this report. According to CNN.com, the verdict will be announced at 4 p.m.

“May It Please the Client: Appellate Practices Expand.” Peter Lattman has this post at The Wall Street Journal Online’s “Law Blog.”

“Anatomy of a Bad Law”: In the April 17, 2006 issue of The Nation, Lauren Bans will have an essay that begins, “In February the South Dakota legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill banning all abortion unless the life of the mother is endangered, with no exceptions for rape or incest.”

“People v. Supreme Court: How a cold-calling ambulance-chaser challenged the country’s most revered institution.” Noam Scheiber’s profile of Tom Goldstein of “SCOTUSblog,” published in the April 10, 2006 issue of The New Republic, can be accessed here (pass-through link). The image of Tom from this week’s cover of that magazine is front and center today at The New Republic Online’s web site.

On today’s broadcast of the public radio program “Here & Now“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “The High Court and Jose Padilla” (featuring Lyle Denniston) and “Defense in Enron Case.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Senate Judiciary Cmte. Hearing on Immigration Issues”: C-SPAN has archived at this link (RealPlayer required) the video of this morning’s hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the subject of whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should handle all immigration appeals.

My earlier coverage of the hearing is here. My previews of the hearing and legislation at issue can be accessed here, here, here, and here.

“CAFC: Patent Rights are Not Protected by the Fifth Amendment.” The “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” today provides this post about Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. My earlier coverage of that ruling is here.

“Padilla Rejected by Supreme Court on Combatant Status”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News provides this report.

And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “US high court won’t review Bush’s terrorism powers.”

Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul R. Michel corrects Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News regarding that court’s jurisdiction: As I noted here yesterday, in an article published yesterday Mintz reported that “the Washington, D.C.-based Federal Circuit Court of Appeals … currently specializes in patent and bankruptcy cases.”

Update: Federal Circuit Chief Judge Michel and Second Circuit Chief Judge John M. Walker, Jr. have thus far testified against the proposed centralization of immigration appeals in the Federal Circuit. Ninth Circuit Judge Carlos T. Bea next testified in favor of the legislation. Thereafter, Senior Second Circuit Judge Jon O. Newman testified against the legislation. In the alternative, Judge Newman suggests a specialized court modeled on the FISA or TECA courts consisting of judges drawn from federal courts throughout the Nation. Finally, U.S. District Judge John M. Roll (D-Ariz.) testified in favor of the legislation.

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List: Today’s Order List can be accessed here. The Court granted review in two cases presenting the same issue, which were consolidated for a single hour of oral argument.

In the Jose Padilla case, the Court today denied review. The denial was accompanied by a concurring opinion by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, in which the Chief Justice and Justice John Paul Stevens joined, and by a dissenting opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justices David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer also noted that they voted to grant review, meaning that the case fell one vote shy of achieving the grant of certiorari.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court refuses to hear Padilla appeal.” Denniston also reports that the Court issued no opinions in argued cases today.

And Gina Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court Rejects War Powers Case.”

“A Simmering Border Dispute; A plan to have the Federal Circuit hear immigration appeals worries judges and advocates alike”: This article (free access) appears in today’s issue of Legal Times.

Today at 10 a.m., the Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing on the issue. My earlier coverage is here.

Update: C-SPAN will provide live coverage of the hearing (in RealPlayer and Windows Media Player formats), while the Judiciary Committee’s own live video feed can be accessed here (RealPlayer required). The witness list is here. Four federal appellate judges, and one U.S. District Judge (who happens to be a vocal proponent of a Ninth Circuit split) are slated to testify.

“Who’s on the Argument Panel: Why Ignorance Isn’t Bliss.” Today’s brand new installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed here.

“Fateful Days Ahead for Enron’s Lay, Skilling; Colleagues’ confessions may make it difficult for defendants to persuade a jury of their innocence”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

And The Houston Chronicle reports today that “Former employees watch, wait and weigh in.”

“Non-English Speakers Want Their Say in Court; Much to the frustration of immigrants trying to navigate California’s civil system, interpreters are provided only for certain cases”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Moussaoui jurors deal with evidence; It includes document of statements made by Sept. 11’s chief planner”: The Richmond Times-Dispatch contains this article today.

And The Los Angeles Times today contains an article headlined “In Court, Two 20th Hijackers Stand Up; Zacarias Moussaoui is on trial for his role in 9/11, but officials now agree it’s likely another detainee was to play a part in the attacks.”

“Papers, Web sites in scrape on stories; Unpaid use angers some publishers”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

“Gay Marriage Advocates Battle in Courts”: David Kravets of The Associated Press provides this report.