“John Yoo’s Tortured Logic”: The May 1, 2006 issue of The Nation will contain a review by Law Professor Stephen Holmes of Law Professor John C. Yoo‘s book, “The Powers of War and Peace: The Constitution and Foreign Affairs After 9/11.”

“High Court Won’t Hear Chinese Detainees’ Case”: This article will appear Tuesday in The Washington Post.

“Habeas Corpus Case Turns on Buttons Worn at Trial”: Linda Greenhouse will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

“9th Circuit Makes Up Mind in Sex Bias Case”: law.com’s Justin Scheck provides this report.

“The world in their sights: Flushed with success, the US anti-abortion movement is radically expanding its goals.” Cristina Page has this essay in Tuesday’s edition of The Guardian (UK).

“Supreme Court sidesteps case of Chinese Muslim captives”: This article will appear Tuesday in The Miami Herald.

And Tuesday’s edition of The International Herald Tribune reports that “High court won’t free 2 detainees.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Supreme Court Hears Workplace Retaliation Case” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Prosecutors Grill Skilling on Enron Debacle“; and “Former Illinois Gov. Ryan Found Guilty of Fraud.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Judicial Selection, Appointments Gridlock, and the Nuclear Option”: Law Professors David S. Law and Lawrence B. Solum have posted their revised paper (abstract with link to download) online at SSRN.

“This case concerns whether a religious student organization may compel a public university law school to fund its activities and to allow the group to use the school’s name and facilities even though the organization admittedly discriminates in the selection of its members and officers on the basis of religion and sexual orientation.” Today the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California answered “no” in a lawsuit brought by the Christian Legal Society Chapter of University of California, Hastings College of the Law. You can access today’s ruling at this link. Some additional background about the case can be accessed here.

“UA policy on campus speeches ruled illegal”: Saturday’s issue of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette contained an article that begins, “The University of Arkansas at Fayetteville’s policy restricting how often outside individuals or groups can speak on campus is unconstitutional, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.” My earlier coverage is here.

“US detainees are no threat, but lose appeal; US Supreme Court declines to take up case of China’s Uighurs, who remain at Guantanamo because they have no place to go”: Warren Richey will have this article Tuesday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Moussaoui’s Lawyers Focus on Troubled Childhood”: Neil A. Lewis of The New York Times provides this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Moussaoui Defense Reviews Life, Childhood.”

News updates available online from The Los Angeles Times: David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court to Review Calif. Murder Trial.”

And in other news, “Justices Won’t Interfere With Subpoenas for Priests’ Files.”

“Prosecutor: Overvalued Enron assets crippled firm’s liquidity.” The Houston Chronicle provides this news update.

Who will speak up on behalf of the fundraising needs of organizations suspected of supporting terrorism? I count at least five judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, dissenting today from an order denying rehearing en banc in United States v. Afshari. Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski wrote the dissent.

The three-judge panel’s opinion, which remains the law of the Ninth Circuit, originally issued on December 20, 2004 and then experienced a few amendments from the panel, resulting in a final version that you can access here. My coverage of the panel’s original ruling is at this link.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Court Weighs Discrimination Retaliation“; “Skilling Says His Testimony Not Rehearsed“; and “Jury Finds Former Ill. Gov. Ryan Guilty.”

Programming note: I will be in court for the first part of this afternoon. Additional posts will appear after I return to the office.

The Associated Press is reporting: Gina Holland reports that “Supreme Court Won’t Hear Falwell’s Appeal.”

And in other news, “Court Declines to Take Kissinger Lawsuit.”

“Supreme Court GVR’s Bill M.” Law Professor Samuel R. Bagenstos has this post today at his “Disability Law” blog.

So you think that the Federal Circuit‘s opinions are boring: Just wait until you hear that court’s oral arguments, available online via this link. The court has also posted online this related privacy notice.

“High Court Won’t Interfere With Subpoenas”: The Associated Press provides this report.

And The AP is also reporting that “Court Rules Against Family’s Asylum Appeal.”

“Hearing Is Believing; Seeing is Even Better”: Today in The Daily Journal of California, Brent Kendall has an article that begins, “There was no shortage of journalists on hand in the Supreme Court two months ago when Justice David H. Souter made a comment about polluters during a debate over the Clean Water Act. But what exactly the soft-spoken New Englander said in the cavernous courtroom on Feb. 21 all depends on which news report you read.”

The article provides some great examples of a central point of my law.com “On Appeal” essay published today under the headline “Should Congress Mandate Supreme Court TV? Will original understanding go high-definition?”

“Supreme Court Will Hear Court Button Case”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court said Monday it will decide if a convicted California killer deserves a new trial because the victim’s family members wore photo buttons at his first trial.”

Access online Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s transmission to Congress of the amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure scheduled to take effect on December 1, 2006: The U.S. Supreme Court’s web site makes the transmittal letters forwarding the amendments available at this link.

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List and per curiam opinion: You can access today’s Order List at this link. The Court granted review in three cases and called for the views of the Solicitor General in two other, apparently interrelated cases. In one of the cases in which certiorari was granted, both the Chief Justice and Justice Stephen G. Breyer are recused.

The Court today also summarily vacated a judgment under review from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by means of a per curiam opinion in Gonzales v. Thomas, No. 05-552.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court grants three cases, acts on asylum issue.”

“Guantanamo Men Lose Supreme Court Appeal” Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from two Chinese Muslims who were mistakenly captured as enemy combatants more than four years ago and are being held at the U.S. prison in Cuba.”

“Supreme Court Hears Employee Retaliation Suit”: This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition.”

“Blawg Review #53”: Available here, at “MauledAgain.”

“Should Congress Mandate Supreme Court TV? Will original understanding go high-definition?” Today’s brand new installment of my weekly “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed here.

“Moussaoui Jury Faces a Complex Defendant; The admitted terrorist could escape execution if found mentally ill; But behind the courtroom tirades is an educated and observant person”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

And CNN.com reports that “Moussaoui’s defense team to present case.”

“Prosecution gets shot at Skilling today; Cross-examination likely to cover conflicting testimony”: This article appears today in USA Today.

And The Houston Chronicle reports today that “Petrocelli making his presence known.”

The New York Times is reporting: Today’s newspaper contains articles headlined “Outrage at Funeral Protests Pushes Lawmakers to Act” and “A Sinister Web Entraps Victims of Cyberstalkers.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Justices to Debate ‘Adverse’ Work Changes” and “Wis. Court Mulls Usage of Victim’s Letter.”