“Why Didn’t Robert Bork Reach the Supreme Court? Because of politics, of course — and that’s fair enough.” Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner has this essay online at Slate.

And law professor Michael McConnell has a jurisprudence essay titled “What if Robert Bork Had Joined the Supreme Court? It probably would have been less politicized and more committed to the rule of law.”

“Supreme Court rulings limit options of gun-control task force”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

“Federal prosecutors involved in escapee’s case offered protection”: The Chicago Sun-Times has this news update.

And The Chicago Tribune has a news update headlined “FBI: Video shows escaped bank robbers getting into cab.”

“TSA Wants to Know if Airport Body Scanners Are Nuking You”: David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“Federal appeals court to hear claim by James ‘Whitey’ Bulger that judge is biased against him”: The Boston Globe has this news update.

“Fears of an Asian Quota in the Ivy League”: The New York Times has just posted online this “Room for Debate” discussion.

“Bork nomination fight altered judicial selection”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Leahy to remain chair of Judiciary; Feinstein of Intel”: CNN.com has this report.

“Postscript: Robert Bork, 1927-2012.” Jeffrey Toobin has this blog post online at The New Yorker.

Online at The New Republic, law professor Jeffrey Rosen has a blog post titled “We’re Still Paying the Price for the Borking of Robert Bork.”

And online at The Atlantic, Andrew Cohen has an essay titled “The Sad Legacy of Robert Bork: The late judge didn’t have a chance to move Supreme Court jurisprudence; But his failure to be confirmed had a profound and regrettable effect on how we nominate justices today.”

He writes a book, and I give it away to a reader of this blog who actually wants it: Yesterday’s mail contained a review copy of the book “In the Name of Justice: Striving for the Rule of Law in China,” written by law professor He Weifang (whose blog you can access here).

It is not for me to explain why I would receive a review copy of this book, instead of a review copy of a new book whose subject matter seems much more relevant to this blog, such as “Scalia and Garner’s Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts.”

Although my influence over the sort of books that people decide to send me apparently extends only so far, I have decided — beginning now — to ensure that any books that I receive that I am not inclined to read will be offered free of charge to a reader of this blog who actually wants the book.

Here are the rules: (1) This offer is open only to individuals who have a mailing address in the United States; (2) If you want the book, you must send me an email explaining why you want the book; (3) The person whom I choose to receive the book will have the opportunity to email me a two-paragraph review of the book due not later than 30 days after receiving the book, which I may choose to publish at “How Appealing” together with the reviewer’s name or (at a minimum) a description of the reviewer’s relevant qualifications; and (4) The person whom I choose to receive the book will need to provide me with his or her name and mailing address, either in the original email that they send or in response to my email advising that he or she has been selected to receive the book. This book being offered right now apparently retails for $34.95 and is not guaranteed to arrive in time for the holidays.

Any reader who is interested in receiving this book should send me an email that arrives at my blog’s email account (appellateblog@hotmail.com) between now and 4 p.m. eastern time on Thursday, December 20, 2012. The book may be mailed to the lucky winner of this giveaway on Friday, December 21, 2012. The selection of a recipient will be within the sole discretion of this blog’s author, and no appeals or original writs will be entertained.

“Michael Douglas watches NY appeals fight over son”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Michael Douglas has been watching from a New York courtroom audience as federal appeals judges consider the validity of his son’s nearly 10-year prison sentence for drug crimes.”

“On the Death of Judge Robert Bork”: Paul J. Larkin, Jr., a former law clerk to Judge Bork, has this post at “The Foundry” blog of The Heritage Foundation.

“Religious challenge to health care law can continue”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

“The New Yorker finds the U.S. Constitution ungrammatical”: Mark Liberman had this post yesterday at “Language Log” commenting on an aspect of Jeffrey Toobin’s blog post titled “So You Think You Know the Second Amendment?”

“The mother behind kids’ long-shot legal crusade”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has this report.

“Former Solicitor General Returns to Law School to Teach Contracts”: Columbia University issued this news release today.

“Gun control measures face new legal landscape”: In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article that begins, “If the rhetoric about a legislative response to the Newtown, Conn., school shootings actually turns into legislation, it will do so in a legal landscape changed by the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision that Americans have a constitutional right to gun ownership.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Gun-Control Backers See No High Court Hurdle for Laws.”

“Conference committee drops ban on indefinite detention of Americans”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this blog post.

“The mark at issue here has two parts: a literal element, consisting of the words COCK SUCKER, and a design element, consisting of a drawing of a crowing rooster.” So explains an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

“The TTABlog” previously reported on the ruling of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in this case in a post that you can access here.

“Robert H. Bork, Conservative Jurist, Dies at 85”: The New York Times has this news update.

The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Judge Robert H. Bork, conservative icon, dies at 85.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Robert Bork, failed Supreme Court nominee, dies at age 85.”

The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Former High Court Nominee Bork Dies.”

USA Today has a news update headlined “Former Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork dies; Bork became a hero to conservatives and a symbol of the heated debate over issues such as abortion.”

The Associated Press has a report headlined “Bork, whose failed nomination made history, dies.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Robert Bork, Judge Defeated in Supreme Court War, Dies at 85.”

David Ingram of Reuters reports that “Conservative U.S. jurist Robert Bork dies at 85.”

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Defeated Supreme Court Nominee Robert Bork Dead at 85.”

Update: Via YouTube, you can access a video tribute that the Federalist Society presented in 2007.

Bork’s C-SPAN appearances can be accessed via this link.

And in October 2012, Adam J. White had an article in Commentary titled “Bork Won.”

“Daring jailbreak kicks off manhunt; 2 bank robbers rappel 15 stories from Loop lockup; police scour suburb where pair last seen”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

“Partial win against birth control rule”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”