How Appealing

Wednesday, June 1, 2005

“Myers Confirmation on Senate Chopping Block”: provides this report.

The Lincoln Journal Star yesterday published an article headlined “Nelson: Deal allows action on energy, highways.”

The Cincinnati Enquirer today contains an article headlined “DeWine’s name helps – and hurts; A long political tradition, but also whispers.”

The Associated Press provides reports headlined “Kennedy: Too early to tell impact of deal on judges” and “Christian groups criticize DeWine’s role in compromise.”

The Reading (Pa.) Eagle today contains an editorial entitled “Senators edge away from nuclear option; A Senate compromise avoids the so-called nuclear option on filibustering judicial nominees.” (Yes, this newspaper now presents its editorials as blog posts — too cool!)

The Albuquerque Tribune yesterday contained an editorial entitled “Senate finally found its (common) senses.”

Today in The Washington Times, Bruce Fein has an op-ed entitled “More Dunkirk than defeat.”

Online at The Weekly Standard, Scott Johnson has an essay entitled “Saying Goodbye to a Great One: Of big bands, a big man and Janice Rogers Brown.”

The Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal yesterday contained an op-ed by Charlie Mitchell entitled “Cochran, Lott opted out of the comity comedy.”

On Monday, the Arkansas News Bureau published an op-ed by John Brummett entitled “Can the Gang of 14 shoot straight?

And last week in The Orlando Sentinel, Peter A. Brown had an op-ed entitled “John McCain sitting pretty.”

Posted at 11:45 PM by Howard Bashman

“Civil Rights Group Plans Bush Judge Attack”: The AP provides an article that begins, “Renewing the struggle over President Bush’s judicial picks, a civil rights group intends to launch a limited ad campaign this week attacking Janice Rogers Brown as a ‘radical judge’ unworthy of confirmation to the appeals court.”

Today’s press release from the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights can be viewed at this link.

Posted at 11:20 PM by Howard Bashman

“Internet Group OKs ‘xxx’ Web Addresses”: The Associated Press provides this report. You can access today’s announcement from the Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers at this link.

Posted at 11:10 PM by Howard Bashman

“N.H. Gov., AG Differ on Abortion Appeal”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins:

New Hampshire’s Democratic governor has found himself on the opposite side of an abortion dispute from his own attorney general, a Republican holdover from the previous administration.

The case involves New Hampshire’s parental-notification law, which was struck down by the courts. Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Attorney General Kelly Ayotte’s bid to have the law reinstated.

Ayotte, the first woman appointed to the state’s top law enforcement position, has not disclosed her personal beliefs on abortion, and has said she is simply duty-bound as attorney general to defend a law enacted by the Legislature.

Gov. John Lynch, who was elected last fall, opposes the law. He has not said whether he will try to replace Ayotte.

The New Hampshire Attorney General’s web site is here, and you can listen online to an interview conducted last summer with Attorney General Kelly Ayotte here (RealPlayer) and here (Windows Media).

Posted at 4:30 PM by Howard Bashman

“Justices Lift Injunction Barring Talk About Cochran, Law Firm; Court Allows Ex-Client to Talk About Cochran”: Brent Kendall has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.

Posted at 4:15 PM by Howard Bashman

En banc Ninth Circuit issues ruling in United States v. Ameline: According to an early report from a reader:

The 103-page mess that is U.S. v. Ameline (the en banc Ninth Circuit Booker case) was filed this morning. The short version is that the court, through a seven-judge majority, agrees to apply the Second and Seventh Circuits’ limited remand approach.

You can access the ruling here (majority opinion) and here (other opinions).

Update: I’ve posted a back-up copy of the entire ruling at this link. Be advised that the file is very large (7.50 MB) and thus takes a while to download.

Posted at 1:32 PM by Howard Bashman

“Courthouse puzzle: Who could refuse $617,000? Man won’t claim money that court says is his.” This article appeared Monday in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Posted at 12:33 PM by Howard Bashman

“Stevens’ mum on confirmation vote part of Senate procedure”: The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner today contains an article that begins, “Sen. Ted Stevens spent months advocating a vote on President Bush’s judicial nominees, but on the first confirmation vote after a compromise ended the lengthy stalemate over Senate filibuster rules, the Alaska Republican said neither ‘yea’ nor ‘nay.'”

Posted at 12:14 PM by Howard Bashman

“Justices Overturn Criminal Verdict in Andersen Case; Court Ruling Could Inhibit Government’s Broader Push Against White-Collar Crime”: Jess Bravin has this article (pass-through link) today in The Wall Street Journal.

Posted at 10:20 AM by Howard Bashman

Available from National Review Online: Law Professor Richard W. Garnett has an essay entitled “Unanimous! Supreme Court breaks from the standard on a religion case.”

Andrew C. McCarthy has an essay entitled “The ‘Mainstream’ Doesn’t Run Through Main Street: Defining the terms…since the Gang of Fourteen wouldn’t.”

And Kathryn Jean Lopez has an essay entitled “Reelect Rick: A defeat for Senator Santorum would have repercussions well beyond Pennsylvania.”

Posted at 10:12 AM by Howard Bashman

“Arthur Andersen’s ‘Victory’: A retrial won’t help the firm’s 28,000 former employees.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

Posted at 8:35 AM by Howard Bashman

In news from Indiana: The New York Times reports today that “Planned Parenthood Is Told to Show Children’s Files.”

And The Indianapolis Star today contains articles headlined “Judge: State may see kids’ medical files; Planned Parenthood seeks a stay of the ruling; appeal also planned“; “ICLU sues over prayers read at Statehouse; References to Jesus Christ in daily invocations exclude others, lawsuit says“; and “Court: Alcohol allegation was proper; Fired Girl Scout leader loses appeal in suit against store worker who reported suspicions.”

Posted at 7:30 AM by Howard Bashman

“Weyerhaeuser verdict upheld”: The Oregonian today contains an article that begins, “A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a $78.75 million judgment against Weyerhaeuser, affirming a Portland jury verdict that the company had run an illegal monopoly in the market for alder sawlogs.”

Posted at 7:20 AM by Howard Bashman

“Prisoners’ Religious Rights Law Upheld; Statute Bars Burdens on Observances”: Charles Lane has this article today in The Washington Post.

Today in USA Today, Joan Biskupic has an article headlined “Court: Let prisoners have access to religion.”

In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “Court upholds law on prisoners’ religious rights.”

In The New York Sun, Luiza Ch. Savage reports that “Prisoner Religious Liberties Law Upheld.”

The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reports that “Justices back inmates on religion; But court says rights, security must balance.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that “Justices uphold law on religious freedom for prisoners; Ohio inmates sued to get Satanism, Wicca ritual objects.”

The Cincinnati Enquirer contains an article headlined “Court: Prisons must give wide religious access; National case began in Ohio.”

And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “ACLU can move ahead with Va. lawsuit; The Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of a law protecting religious freedom.”

Posted at 7:10 AM by Howard Bashman

“Andersen’s conviction overturned; High court criticizes instructions to jury in 2002 Enron case”: Jan Crawford Greenburg has this article today in The Chicago Tribune. The newspaper also reports that “Andersen alumni see ruling as vindication; Though many say the reversal of the firm’s conviction avenges ‘a business lynching’ by the government, the victory is bittersweet.”

In The Houston Chronicle today, Mary Flood reports that “Andersen document shredding conviction overturned; Supreme Court returns case to Houston, dealing Enron Task Force a major setback.” The newspaper also reports that “Ruling stirs emotions; For former Andersen employees, a bit of pride returns.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic has an article headlined “Ruling: Instructions to jury were flawed; Culpability was not stressed, justices say.” And a related article is headlined “A posthumous victory; Supreme Court overturns Andersen conviction, but it’s too late for 28,000 workers.”

The Los Angeles Times contains articles headlined “Bittersweet Verdict for Firm’s Alumni; With the reversal of Arthur Andersen’s conviction, former partners feel vindicated but they continue to suffer financially” and “White-Collar Prosecutions May Face Higher Hurdle; A high-court ruling could force prosecutors to change how they prove a crime; Frank Quattrone’s lawyers see hope for his appeal.”

In The Baltimore Sun, Gail Gibson reports that “Court reverses conviction of Enron auditor; Justices say jurors relied on flawed instructions; Charges wrecked accounting firm; U.S. to weigh possibility of Arthur Andersen retrial.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Andersen wins high court fight; Criminal conviction for shredding Enron papers is thrown out.” The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Vindication, of sorts, for former Arthur Andersen employees.”

The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court overturns Andersen conviction.”

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that “High Court overturns Andersen conviction.”

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that “Former office chief finds little to cheer.”

The Charlotte Observer reports that “Ruling isn’t expected to alter firms’ procedures.”

The Toronto Globe and Mail reports that “Supreme Court overrules jury — but too late to save Andersen.”

The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts contains an editorial entitled “Andersen accountable despite court’s ruling.”

And in The Houston Chronicle, business columnist Loren Steffy has an essay entitled “It might be useful to remember reasons behind original verdict.”

Posted at 7:00 AM by Howard Bashman