How Appealing

Thursday, August 11, 2005

“Memos Show Roberts as a Reagan-Era Adviser on Sensitive Political Matters”: Neil A. Lewis will have this article in Friday’s edition of The New York Times. The newspaper will also report that “Abortion Rights Group Plans to Pull Ad on Roberts.”

The Chicago Tribune on Friday will report that “Roberts praised bucking the liberal establishment, memo shows.”

The Guardian (UK) on Friday reports that “Abortion rights group launches campaign against Bush nominee.”

Friday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain an editorial entitled “Abortion Smear.”

And The Minneapolis Star Tribune on Friday will contain an editorial entitled “Public records: Bush’s secrecy goes too far.”

Posted at 11:28 PM by Howard Bashman

“The closest analogy to the substantive due process argument in Dred Scott v. Sandford isn’t Roe v. Wade. It’s the dissenters’ position in Kelo v New London.” Law Professor Jack M. Balkin has this post online today at his blog “Balkinization.”

Posted at 4:20 PM by Howard Bashman

“Roberts’s involvement in the clinic violence case: why it troubles us.” This post appears today at the National Women’s Law Center “Nomination Watch” blog.

And David at “Blue Mass. Group” has a post titled “NARAL’s anti-Roberts smear.”

Posted at 3:15 PM by Howard Bashman

“Judge Roberts’ View From the Bench: Deciding cases is a lot harder than he thought it would be, the high court nominee told college students in a February speech.” Maura Reynolds had this article yesterday in The Los Angeles Times. According to the article:

In February, in what was apparently his last public address before he began to be vetted as a possible nominee, Roberts gave a speech to students at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., that is likely to provide fodder for the debate

National Public Radio has posted online the audio of the speech, which clocks-in at forty-five minutes, and you can listen online by clicking here (RealPlayer required).

Posted at 3:10 PM by Howard Bashman

“Police can keep photos of officers private, judge says”: The Cleveland Plain Dealer today contains an article that begins, “Police departments can refuse to release photos of their officers under exemptions in the state’s public records law, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.” You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link.

Posted at 3:05 PM by Howard Bashman

En banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issues its ruling in United States v. Councilman: The majority opinion begins:

This case presents an important question of statutory construction. We must decide whether interception of an e-mail message in temporary, transient electronic storage states an offense under the Wiretap Act, as amended by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2522. The government believes it does, and indicted Councilman under that theory. The district court disagreed and dismissed the indictment. A divided panel of this court affirmed. We granted review en banc and now reverse.

Today’s decision, in its entirety, can be accessed at this link. The First Circuit’s earlier, three-judge panel ruling, which reached the opposite result from today’s en banc decision, can be accessed here.

Posted at 2:45 PM by Howard Bashman

Over the dissent of nine judges, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denies rehearing en banc in case holding that Crawford v. Washington applies retroactively: Today’s order denying rehearing en banc, accompanied by a dissent, can be accessed here. The earlier ruling by a divided three-judge panel, which the Ninth Circuit has refused to rehear en banc, can be accessed here. According to today’s dissent, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling “conflicts with the decision of every other circuit to have considered the retroactivity of Crawford.”

Posted at 12:45 PM by Howard Bashman

“Recusal on appeal: An appellate advocate’s perspective.” The Spring 2005 issue of The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process will be reaching subscribers, including all federal and state appellate judges in the Nation, any day now. The issue focuses on recusal on appeal and includes essays focusing on the subject from the judicial, academic, and advocate’s perspectives. I am the author of the essay addressing the issue from an advocate’s perspective, and the text of my essay can be accessed online at this link.

Posted at 12:08 PM by Howard Bashman

“Why big business hearts John Roberts; It’s looking like George W. Bush named a Supreme Court nominee that corporate honchos can love”: Michael Scherer has this essay today at

And today at National Review Online, Peter Kirsanow has an essay entitled “Roberts’s Rules of Order: The Constitution doesn’t live and breathe in his body of work,” while David Hogberg and Tamara Kafkova have an essay entitled “Endangered Roberts? Greens eye the Supreme Court nominee.”

Posted at 10:28 AM by Howard Bashman

“The hard-boiled justice of Judge Scalia”: In case you missed last week’s heart-warming installment of “Tom the Dancing Bug” comic strip, wherein Scalia finds an infant in the Indiana woods and names him John Roberts, you can access it here. Part two of the story is now available online at this link via

Posted at 10:22 AM by Howard Bashman

“High Court Declines State’s Direct Appeal of Same-Sex Marriage Ruling”: Today in The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan has an article that begins, “The California Supreme Court decided Wednesday to put off for at least a year a decision on whether a state ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional.”

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “High court says no to same-sex marriage review.”

And in The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz reports that “State court delays entering same-sex marriage fray.”

Posted at 10:12 AM by Howard Bashman

“Judge Flaum’s opinions earmark him as a would-be John Paul Stevens on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals”: This memorandum (page 3 of the PDF file) from today’s National Archives document release discussed in the post immediately below appears to be an analysis from inside President Reagan’s Justice Department of whether U.S. District Judge Joel M. Flaum should be nominated to serve on the Seventh Circuit. Apparently the views of the memo’s author did not prevail, as today Judge Flaum serves as the Seventh Circuit’s Chief Judge.

Posted at 9:00 AM by Howard Bashman

“Justice sues AG over records in rebuke case”: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer today contains an article that begins, “State Supreme Court Justice Richard Sanders, who is challenging his punishment for touring the McNeil Island center for sexual predators, is suing the Attorney General’s Office to shake loose public records dealing with the visit that got him in hot water.”

Posted at 7:22 AM by Howard Bashman

“Bush Order Lets Him Control Roberts’ Memos; A 2001 decree gives him the power to block the release of papers from presidential libraries, among them those of the high court nominee”: David G. Savage and Maura Reynolds have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

In The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse reports that “TV Ad Attacking Court Nominee Provokes Furor.”

The Washington Post reports that “In ’81, Roberts Offered Counsel to O’Connor; As Aide to Attorney General, He Urged Nominee to Be Reserved in Sharing Legal Views.”

The Wichita Eagle reports that “Roberts faces scrutiny of role in Wichita case.”

The Washington Times contains articles headlined “In 1980s, Roberts wary of new right” and “Anti-Roberts ad called ‘flawed.’

The San Francisco Chronicle contains articles headlined “Gay issues destined for top Court; Activists agree Justice Roberts would be pivotal in same-sex marriage cases” and “Boxer threatens to slow Senate activity over court pick; She’ll vote ‘no’ unless Roberts backs right to abortion.”

In The Oakland Tribune, Josh Richman reports that “Boxer knocks record of Supreme Court nominee; Senator hasn’t decided her vote but has concerns.”

The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Boxer attacks Roberts’ work opposing clinic protection.”

And The Portland (Me.) Press Herald reports that “TV stations urged to pull Roberts ad.”

In commentary, The Washington Times today contains an editorial entitled “Lies from the far-left.”

The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts contains an editorial entitled “Running out the clock isn’t exactly dignified.”

In The Chicago Sun-Times, columnist Robert Novak has an op-ed entitled “Roberts fight now a battle over future.”

In The Washington Post, Dana Milbank’s “Washington Sketch” column is headlined “Antagonist of the Left Expresses Righteous Indignation About Roberts.”

In The Los Angeles Times, Abigail Thernstrom has an op-ed entitled “Roberts, misjudged.”

And in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jay Bookman has an op-ed entitled “Privacy right unlisted, but perfectly clear.”

Posted at 7:00 AM by Howard Bashman