“Slate’s Jurisprudence: Conservatives vs. Fed Courts.” This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

“Appeals court upholds Sex.com ruling”: Last Friday’s edition of USA Today contained this article. The decision isn’t leaping out at me from the Ninth Circuit’s web site, which is why I haven’t provided a link to it.

“Wretched judging”: Today in The Washington Times, Bruce Fein has an op-ed that begins, “The fight over President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees is a fight between clashing conceptions of judging.”

“Frist Says Courts in Schiavo Case Acted Fairly”: Thomas Ferraro of Reuters provides this report.

“InstaPundit” comments on Senator John Cornyn’s remarks about violence against judges: See this post. A transcript of the remarks can be accessed via this earlier post of mine.

“How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb”: Douglas T. Kendall and Jennifer Bradley of Community Rights Counsel have this “nuclear option”-related op-ed today in Roll Call.

“U.S. Mishandled Prisoner Policy, Ex-Adviser Says”: Jess Bravin has this article (pass-through link) today in The Wall Street Journal. The ex-adviser in question is William H. Taft IV, formerly the State Department’s top lawyer.

“Barnes student says he, too, wants to expedite appeal”: This newsbrief appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer reporting on a pleading that I filed yesterday in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in response to an emergency application that The Barnes Foundation recently filed in that court.

Reuters is reporting: Now available online are reports headlined “Law Expands Right to Kill in Self-Defense” and “Asbestos Bill on Its Way, U.S. Senate’s Frist Says.”

“Frist: Schiavo, Bush Nominees Unrelated.” Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Federal Circuit to Decide Patentability of Crustless Sandwich”: “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” provides this preview of a case to be argued tomorrow before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

And that blog also offers a summary of yesterday’s order denying rehearing en banc, plus dissents, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Pfizer, Inc.

Phil A. Buster is a white megaphone with red piping, blue high-top sneakers, white gloves, eyeballs, and eyelashes: Alliance for Justice has today announced the launch of www.SavePhil.com.

“Court Rules Common Law Protects Recordings”: The Associated Press reports here that “New York’s highest court ruled that common law protects the rights of a record company for music recorded before the 1972 federal copyright law in a decision the judges expect to have ‘significant ramifications for the music recording industry.'”

Today’s ruling of the New York State Court of Appeals, on certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, can be accessed at this link.

Federal judge calls behavior of criminal defense counsel “childish, inappropriate, unprofessional, uncivil and even unethical” and describes Kansas City Star article reporting on judge’s earlier comments as “not a truthful, objective account”: The Kansas City Star reports today that “Judge to stay on for Wittig-Lake retrial; Case next month won’t be moved from KCK.” And The Topeka Capital-Journal reports that “Retrial set for Kansas City; Wittig, Lake attorneys had sought change of venue, judge’s recusal.”

The rulings that U.S. District Judge Julie A. Robinson issued yesterday denying the request for her recusal and denying a request for a transfer of venue are available online. You can also access online a copy of the motion requesting a transfer of venue.

“Panel’s mission: Define obscenity; Kansas effort uses little-known law.” The Kansas City Star today contains an article that begins:

A grand jury of 15 persons is expected to be seated today in central Kansas with just one question to answer: What is obscene?
Before they decide, they may watch one or two X-rated movies, analyze dozens of sexual devices and get a crash course on adult toys.

In earlier coverage, The Salina Journal reported last month that “Jury got eyeful in Omaha case; Jurors watched explicit videos for hours in case against Haltom’s store.”

“Court Denies Challenge to Domestic Partners Law; An appellate panel rules that a new state statute extending rights does not constitute same-sex marriage or violate Proposition 22”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Domestic partner law upheld; It doesn’t violate ban on same-sex marriage, court says.”

And The Sacramento Bee reports that “Partners law passes court test.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District at this link.

Reader mail: Judge Stuart Shiffman of Springfield, Illinois emails:

As one of your avid readers, every once and a while I am driven to write to you. Your publication of Senator Cornyn’s complete remarks is praiseworthy. While they place the Senator’s thoughts in somewhat of a better context, they do not in any way minimize the notion that the American Judiciary is currently under attack by those who disagree with some of its decisions.

Senator Cornyn seems to equate assaults on Judges with disagreement with their decisions. How absurd. The man who killed the Lefkow family was a deranged individual who knew nothing of any court decision other than his own. The escaping prisoner in Georgia who killed a judge in his courtroom was not striking a blow for the legislative branch in its ongoing battle with the judiciary. To even suggest such a position is absurd.

Senator Cornyn is correct that respect for the judiciary is waning. But the reason is because the media and politicians at both ends of the political spectrum use the judiciary as a whipping boy to stir the frenzy of the fringe element in politics. Politicians do it because it gets votes. The media does it because it gets viewers and subscribers.

Those of us who respect the law and the courts as an institution can only wring our hands in sorrow over these attacks.

Senator Cornyn speaks of his love and respect for the law. Everyone respects the law and the courts when they agree with decisions. True respect comes from supporting the courts when they rule against you.

My post linking to the full transcript of Senator Cornyn’s remarks can be accessed here.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speaks on the role of international law in adjudication: Thanks much to the reader who managed to figure out that C-SPAN has made the video available at this link (RealPlayer required). Maybe my ears are failing me, but based on the recorded audio I could swear that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice introduces Justice Ginsburg as “one of our democracy’s most disdained jurists.”

Justice Ginsburg delivered this address last Friday, and Saturday’s edition of The New York Times contained an article headlined “Justice Ginsburg Backs Value of Foreign Law.”

Update: Several readers have emailed to suggest that Secretary of State Rice introduced Justice Ginsburg as “one of our democracy’s most esteemed jurists.” I’m sure that’s correct, although it certainly doesn’t sound like it on C-SPAN’s recording.

“Harasser of top court may be in hot water”: Yesterday, The Deseret Morning News contained an article that begins, “A 55-year-old Salt Lake man, who last week set a precedent for irritating the justices of the Utah Supreme Court to the point of being found in contempt, now appears faced with further allegations of contempt.”

And in related coverage, almost two weeks ago The Salt Lake Tribune reported that “Pestering of justices lands man in jail for contempt of court.”

“Marrying cousins still face obstacles”: This article appeared yesterday in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

“Attacking a Free Judiciary”: The New York Times today contains an editorial that begins, “The low point in the politicking over Terri Schiavo came last week when the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, threatened the judges who ruled in her case.”

“It’s difficult to see why Cornyn would make so asinine a comment if he had not intended to send the message that federal judges should watch what they do from now on”: So writes Yale Law Professor Jack M. Balkin in a blog post you can access here.

Earlier, I collected in posts accessible here and here press coverage of the remarks that Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) delivered yesterday on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

You can now access online a transcript of Senator Cornyn’s remarks. They span four pages of the Congressional Record, and you can access the remarks in full by clicking on the following pages in ascending order: one, two, three, four.

Bald litigant sued for cybersquatting — just think of the potential for humor: See, for example, the first paragraph of this opinion that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

In news coverage, David Kravets of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: Man Can Disparage Company on Web.”

“Congressional hearings scrutinize Patriot Act; Has it helped combat terrorists? Attorney general to make the case.” Tom Curry, national affairs writer for MSNBC, has this report today.

And The Associated Press reports that “Gonzales to Defend Patriot Act Renewal.”

“‘Liars,’ Libel and Liability: In a surprising decision, the Supreme Court is refusing to take up a key 1st Amendment case.” The Los Angeles Times today contains an editorial that begins, “The most surprising decision the Supreme Court rendered last week was not about gender discrimination in high school sports or age discrimination, the two most widely reported cases. The justices’ most notable and dismaying action was their one-line refusal to take up a case hitting at the core of 1st Amendment freedoms.”

“Supreme Court rules IRAs exempt from bankruptcy proceedings”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

David G. Savage is reporting: Today in The Los Angeles Times, he has articles headlined “Law Students Prevail Again in High Court; Stanford’s litigation clinic offers hands-on training, and a chance to change the law” and “IRAs Shielded in Bankruptcy, Justices Rule; In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court says creditors may not seize money in the retirement accounts to collect on debts.”

“Conservatives push judicial votes”: The Washington Times contains this article today.

Financial Times reports today that “Republicans weigh plan to vaporise Senate roadblocks.”

The Boston Globe contains a news analysis headlined “Frustrated movement is eyeing rules options.”

The Washington Post reports that “Post-Schiavo Questions Await Congress’s GOP Leaders; Priorities Debated As Recess Ends.”

And The Poughkeepsie Journal contains an editorial entitled “‘Nuclear option’ is lousy choice.”

“Senator links violence, judges; Cornyn suggests ‘political decisions’ may be a factor in recent incidents at courthouses”: This article appears today in The Houston Chronicle.

And The Dallas Morning News reports today that “Cornyn theorizes on violence; Democrat calls senator’s remarks on judges, accountability ‘bizarre.’”

I hope to link to the transcript of these remarks once it become available online via the Congressional Record, so that people can decide for themselves whether the remarks are as bizarre as they seem to be from press accounts.

On this date in “How Appealing” history: On April 4, 2003, I had a post titled “Likelike Highway” about surprising news leaks from the D.C. Circuit in connection with the then-pending campaign finance reform case.

Meanwhile, on this day in 2004, I had a post titled “Law Professor Lawrence Lessig disagrees with Forbes.com columnist’s plea of ‘Let’s Have Less Of Lessig.’” And little did I suspect at the time of writing this post, but the particular National Constitution Center opening day bonkee featured in the post now works just down the hall from where my office is located.

“Bankruptcy Shield for IRAs Upheld; Supreme Court Addresses Older Workers’ Retirement Assets”: Charles Lane will have this article Tuesday in The Washington Post.

Linda Greenhouse is reporting: In Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times, she will have articles headlined “Supreme Court Ruling Bars Creditors From I.R.A. Assets” and “Justices Decline to Rule on Limits for Drug-Sniffing Dogs.”

By the way, early next month Ms. Greenhouse’s new book, titled “Becoming Justice Blackmun: Harry Blackmun’s Supreme Court Journey,” will be released. Of course, the book tour will be bringing her to Philadelphia. The book can be pre-ordered via Amazon.com, and I’m mentioning the book without regard to whether I’m going receive a review copy (although hope springs eternal).

“Kill Bill: Microsoft’s army of lawyers was no match for a kid from Kent State.” This article appears in the current issue of Cleveland Scene. Thanks to “42 U.S.C. 1983” for the pointer.

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Justices Rule IRAs Protected in Bankruptcies.”

Jonathan Ringel reports that “High Court Rules on Habeas Timing Question; Justices agree that lower courts were wrong but split 5-4 against helping inmate.”

In other news, “Drawing the Line on Punitive Awards; California Supreme Court to decide how ‘Campbell’ limits apply in state.”

And an article from The National Law Journal is headlined “Employers Wrestle With Blogosphere; As bloggers multiply, managers scramble to form at-work policy.”

In Tuesday’s edition of The Hill: The newspaper will contain two judicial filibuster-related articles, “K St. fears nuclear winter” and “Dems face their own dilemma.”