“Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday closely questioned the qualifications, driving record and tax-payment history of a Michigan judge nominated to the federal court of appeals that hears cases for Michigan and other Midwestern states.” So begins this article published today in The Detroit News.

You can now access by clicking here (RealPlayer required) the video of yesterday’s hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee for Sixth Circuit nominees Helene N. White and Raymond M. Kethledge.

Update: In other news coverage, Neil A. Lewis of The New York Times reports that “White House and Democrats Move on Ohio Court Plan.”

Tenth Circuit holds that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not preclude the federal government from prosecuting a member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe of Wyoming who shot a bald eagle for use in the tribe’s traditional religious ceremony: Circuit Judge Michael W. McConnell was the author of today’s unanimous, 44-page opinion.

Today’s ruling holds that “the Eagle Act and its regulations are the least restrictive means of pursuing the government’s compelling interest in preserving the bald eagle.”

In news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court rules against man in bald eagle-religion case.”

“This case calls on us to address whether veterans who served on ships off the coast of Vietnam during the Vietnam War served ‘in the Republic of Vietnam’ and thus are entitled to the presumption of service connection if they suffer from one of the listed diseases.” A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today issued this ruling in a case involving claims for Agent Orange-related disability compensation.

Today’s opinion explains that “[b]y regulation, the Department of Veterans Affairs has interpreted the phrase ‘served in the Republic of Vietnam’ to mean that the veteran’s service must have involved ‘duty or visitation’ in the Republic of Vietnam in order for the veteran to be entitled to the statutory presumption of service connection.” The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, however, rejected the agency’s interpretation as unduly restrictive. In the decision issued today, the majority holds that “the agency’s requirement that a claimant have been present within the land borders of Vietnam at some point in the course of his duty constitutes a permissible interpretation of the statute and its implementing regulation, and we therefore reverse the judgment of the Veterans Court.”

“Court Issues Split Decision In Lucent-Microsoft Dispute”: Dow Jones Newswires provide this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

“McCain’s half-truths about judges”: Columnist Linda P. Campbell has this op-ed today in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

And online at The American Spectator, Quin Hillyer has an essay entitled “Judging McCain.”

Programming note: I’m among the parents who will be accompanying my son’s Latin class on a school trip today. Additional posts will appear here this afternoon.

“Court rules deal violated BP blast victims’ rights; $50 million fine in plea bargain for refinery deaths yet to be approved”: Today in The Houston Chronicle, Mary Flood has an article that begins, “A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the rights of victims of the 2005 BP explosion in Texas City were violated by Houston federal prosecutors and a judge, but the plea bargain they object to remains on the table.”

Update: You can access yesterday’s Fifth Circuit ruling at this link.

“GOP slows approval for judgeships; 3 Michigan nominees face tough questions from U.S. senators despite deal with Bush administration”: This article appears today in The Detroit News.