“Kill Phil: The filibuster lets Democrats win political battles while skirting the culture wars–which is why we should abolish it.” Jonathan Cohn has this essay in the April 25, 2005 issue of The New Republic.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decides case involving election campaign for Mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico: In today’s ruling, on appeal from a decision of Merit Systems Protection Board, the Federal Circuit considers the constitutionality of the Hatch Act, a federal statute that prohibits covered government employees from engaging in certain partisan political activities.

“Republicans to Go on Offensive Over Judges”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Senate filibuster clash will reverberate across America; Crucial vote coming on Frist’s move to end Democratic blockade of judicial nominees”: Tom Curry, national affairs writer for MSNBC, provides this report.

The article quotes Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) as saying, “We’ve circulated Judge Pryor’s five opinions in support of the district judge in (the) Schiavo (case), so we’re working on it.” I bet Eleventh Circuit Judge William H. Pryor, Jr. will be surprised to learn that he wrote even a single opinion in support of the federal district court’s ruling in the Terri Schiavo case.

Available online from The New Republic: Michael Crowley has an essay entitled “The Day After: Can Democrats survive a nuclear winter?”

And Keelin McDonell has an essay entitled “Judge Dread: How conservatives who oppose judicial activism may have weakened their own cause.”

“CIA Says Sen. Frist Lacks Nuclear Capability”: “ScrappleFace” provides this report.

One license plate, under bumper: The Ohio News Network reports here that “The Ohio Senate has unanimously passed and sent the House a bill that would authorize the state to sell license plates featuring the American flag and the ‘One Nation Under God’ motto.”

“Commentary: gay marriage in Oregon.” Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog” provides this analysis of yesterday’s ruling by the Supreme Court of Oregon.

In other coverage, The New York Times reports today that “Oregon Supreme Court Invalidates Same-Sex Marriages.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Court Nullifies Oregon’s Gay Marriages; Advocates of same-sex unions promise to keep trying; Conservative groups say the ruling, which voids about 3,000 licenses, settles the issue.”

The Oregonian contains articles headlined “Court annuls gay marriages“; “Sense of rejection pains couples but doesn’t deter them; Sadness mixes with anger as partners learn their marriages in Multnomah County have been nullified“; and “Court decision affirms couples’ religious convictions; Some opponents of same-sex marriage stress the importance of gender roles in parenting and society.”

The Salem Statesman Journal today contains articles headlined “Court voids vows“; “Justices show the reasoning behind their conclusions; They say Measure 36 is an operational law, not a principle“; “Gay couples disappointed but not deterred; Some say they will direct attention to civil unions and state legislation“; “Gay marriage debate shifts to civil-union bill; Other bills would broaden protections from discrimination“; and “Religious officials react swiftly to court’s decision; Bible provides different interpretations for community members.”

The Portland Tribune reports that “3,022 gay unions end in a moment; Supreme Court says county was wrong to grant marriage licenses.”

The Mail Tribune of Medford, Oregon reports that “Local gay couples express disappointment, not surprise, at court ruling.”

The Daily Vanguard of Portland State University reports that “Same-sex couples saddened by court decision; Couples married last year say Oregon Supreme Court ruling is a blow, but fight for marriage continues.”

The Corvallis Gazette-Times reports that “Court dashes marriage hopes; Supporters of traditional values hail ruling to void same-sex unions.”

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that “Same-sex marriages voided in Oregon; Washington couples who rushed to Portland are disheartened by ruling.”

The Seattle Times reports that “Some feel jilted by Oregon ruling on gay marriage.”

The Bellingham Herald reports that “Birch Bay couple unruffled by ruling.”

Finally, The Washington Times, whose coverage of this issue exemplifies why the term “scare quotes” was invented, reports that “Oregon court voids same-sex ‘marriages.’”

“80 California bloggers weigh-in on Apple subpoena case”: “The Southern California Law Blog” reports here on an amicus brief filed yesterday in the California Court of Appeal for the Sixth Appellate District.

“Scalia Subjected to Probing Question, the Aftermath”: “Wonkette” provides this riposte from the questioner in question.

Baseball and taxes: This evening, I will have the pleasure of spending my second consecutive Jackie Robinson Day at the ballpark watching my hometown Philadelphia Phillies. Unlike last year, when the Phillies played a day game, I’ll be attending tonight’s game with my son, the region’s second biggest Atlanta Braves fan, as the Phillies host the Braves.

Tax Day also provides an opportunity to measure objectively how the first year at my appellate boutique fared. I think the proverbial tax man will be quite pleased, as he received a far greater amount of money from me than ever before. If there’s any bright side, at least I was able to avoid the dreaded AMT.

“Justice Scalia defends textualism”: This article appeared Wednesday in The Vanderbilt Hustler.

“Latest Assault on Judges Threatens Rule of Law”: Law Professor Cass R. Sunstein has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Peggy Quince Tries To Pull A Full Scalia”: Columnist Daniel Ruth has this essay today in The Tampa Tribune. I previously linked here to news coverage of this matter.

“House Hearing on Budget for Supreme Court of the U.S.”: C-SPAN has made available online the video of this noteworthy hearing from earlier in the week, at which Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas appeared. To launch the video, click here (RealPlayer required).

I previously linked to news coverage of the hearing here and here.

“Strife-Cycles: Judge-bashing is hardly new.” Law Professor Rodger Citron has this jurisprudence essay online today at Slate.

“Court rules against Wiccan; It says Chesterfield meets requirements for legislative prayer”: This article appears today in The Richmond Times-Dispatch.

And The Washington Post reports that “Wiccan Bias Suit Against Va. County Dismissed.”

“Guardsman who challenged ‘stop-loss’ policy leaving for Afghanistan”: The Seattle Times contains this article today.

“Bill allows divorce for pregnant women”: The Associated Press provides this report from Washington State, where now it is also permissible to impugne a lady’s chaste reputation.

“Next stop for the peripatetic Barnes Foundation: the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.” This article, in which I am mentioned, appeared yesterday in The Main Line (Pa.) Life.

And in somewhat related news, The Philadelphia Daily News today contains an article headlined “Union: Moving Barnes to Parkway to cost $7M.”

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) has launched a web page devoted to judicial filibusters and the nuclear option: You can access the page by clicking here.

“Senate on brink of ‘nuclear’ filibuster war; GOP, Democrats ramp up to fight over debate limits”: This article appears today in USA Today.

The Times Argus reports today that “Leahy’s stance on filibuster challenged.”

The Knoxville News-Sentinel contains an editorial entitled “U.S. Senate doesn’t need to go nuclear.”

In The Los Angeles Times, columnist Jonathan Chait has an op-ed entitled “On Filibuster, Hypocrisy Rules.”

In The Washington Times, Wendy E. Long has an op-ed entitled “Filibuster myth-busters.”

In The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, columnist Joel Connelly has an essay entitled “Religious rightists using scary tactics to pad courts.”

And USA Today offers letters to the editor under the heading “Rhetoric about judges raises deep concerns.”

In today’s edition of The New York Sun: Luiza Ch. Savage has an article headlined “Buffalo Native Is Seen as a Confirmable Conservative” that begins:

If President Bush is looking for a potential Supreme Court nominee with conservative credentials who would inspire a minimum of fuss at a confirmation hearing, he may turn to Judge John Roberts Jr., say fans of the Buffalo native, who sits on the U.S Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

And in other news, Josh Gerstein reports that “Judge Approves $40M Settlement Against Abercrombie & Fitch Chain.”

“Harvard finds ‘significant lapse’ in phrasing in Tribe book; ‘Inadvertent’ is Harvard verdict”: The Boston Globe contains this article today.

And The Harvard Crimson reports today that “School Won’t Punish Tribe; Summers, Kagan will not discipline professor whose book lifted text verbatim.”

“Griffith’s nomination to Court of Appeals advances; BYU counsel: But some Democrats are still questioning his law license credentials.” This article appears today in The Salt Lake Tribune.

The Deseret Morning News today contains an article headlined “BYU attorney bench bound? Democrats won’t filibuster controversial judicial nomination.”

And in USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Prominent nominee has bipartisan support.”

Meanwhile, The Charlotte Observer reports today that “N.C. judicial nominees will move on to full Senate vote; Conrad, Dever bids had been blocked by then-Sen. Edwards.”

On this date in “How Appealing” history: Two years ago today, on April 14, 2003, I had a post titled “Sealed for your protection” reporting on the Fourth Circuit‘s decision that day in the case captioned Under Seal v. Under Seal. I also had a rather amusing post titled “Strange cases call for strange measures” reporting on the Ninth Circuit‘s ruling that day in a case involving Area 51. The decision that I quoted in my post suggests that appellate judges should perhaps not watch History Channel documentaries about subjects closely related to pending cases.

Meanwhile, one year ago today, I had posts reporting that “Sex toys no longer for sale in Mississippi” and that “The Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules of the U.S. Courts approves proposed Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1, which would allow unpublished and non-precedential opinions to be cited to all U.S. Courts of Appeals.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Appeals Court Rules Against Wiccan in Va.“; “Rosa Parks, Rap Duo OutKast Settle Lawsuit“; and “Authorities: Finger Unlikely Nev. Woman’s.”

“Oregon Court Nullifies Gay Marriages”: This segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered.”

This evening’s broadcast of the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” had a segment (transcript with link to audio) on today’s ruling from Oregon.

The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Oregon Justices Void Gay Marriage Licenses.”

And The Salem Statesman Journal provides a news update headlined “Oregon Supreme Court denies gay marriage; Basic Rights Oregon to file new lawsuit.”

“Lethal Injections Called Flawed; Inmates May Feel Pain, Study Finds”: This article will appear Friday in The Washington Post.

The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Lethal Injection Executions May Cause Suffering.”

And in related news from Kentucky, The Associated Press reports that “Trial to decide if lethal injection constitutional.”

“Bench Pressed: A pair of high court justices offer advocates advice about the proliferation of amicus briefs.” law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this report.

“Frist Likely to Push for Ban on Filibusters; Failure Risks Conservatives’ Ire; Success May Prompt Legislative Stalemate”: This article will appear Friday in The Washington Post.

And Friday’s edition of The New York Times will report that “Frist Set to Join Religious Effort on Judicial Issue.”

“Harvard Reprimands Law Professor Over Book”: The AP reports here that “Harvard University reproached law professor Laurence H. Tribe for failing to properly credit another author’s work in a book published two decades ago.”

“Appeals court hears Nebraska abortion case”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“What may be behind long nominee battles: In one theory, a stellar resume actually causes delay in Senate confirmation of judicial picks”: Warren Richey will have this article in Friday’s edition of The Christian Science Monitor.

The study in question — “The Judicial Confirmation Process: The Difficulty in Being Smart” — can be accessed at this link.

“Fight over abortion continues; Parental consent: Law passed but mired in court for eight years.” This article appears today in The Anchorage Daily News.