Available online from law.com: An article is headlined “Roberts Recusal From ABA Case a Sign of Strict Standards?”

And in other news, “Calif. Justices See Retaliation in Makeup Case.”

“NARAL Communications Director Resigns”: FOXNews.com provides this report.

“Judgment Day: Are judges the new doctors?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“NARAL Pulls Ad Criticizing Roberts”: This segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered.”

“Today I am not announcing my support for, or opposition to the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court.” The text of the speech that U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) delivered on Wednesday can be accessed here. I previously collected news coverage of the speech at this link.

“Conservatives Alarmed at Roberts’ Role in Playboy Case”: So reports Robert B. Bluey at Human Events Online.

“Alabama clinic nurse defends ad against Roberts nomination”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Less Hysteria, More Perspective”: CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen today has an essay that begins, “There has been way too much hysteria and not nearly enough perspective in the debate over the Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts, Jr. It may be a hot and steamy August, but the Beltway spinners and special-interest shriekers ought to just chill a bit.”

“Senate Democrats Request Roberts Documents”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Judge’s error in sealing affidavits hardly harmless”: Douglas Lee has this commentary online at the First Amendment Center.

“Senate Democrats demand certain Roberts documents”: Reuters provides this report.

“Diaz innocent on all judicial bribery charges; no verdict reached on some charges against three others”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi provides a news update that begins, “Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz Jr. is innocent on all judicial bribery charges against him, a federal jury decided this morning.”

And in other coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Four Innocent of Bribery Charges in Miss.”

“Supreme Court Opinions: October 2004 Term.” The Congressional Research Service recently issued this report summarizing the opinions issued in the 2004 Term.

“E-mail wiretap case can proceed, court says”: Declan McCullagh provides this report at c|net News.Com.

“Attack Ad Is First Casualty of U.S. High Court Battle”: Bloomberg News provides this report.

Sixth Circuit holds unconstitutional municipal ordinance regulating parades on the city streets and sidewalks of Dearborn, Michigan: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. City of Dearborn at this link.

“Job bias case challenges facial makeup”: This article about a case pending before an eleven-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit appears today in The Sacramento Bee.

“Court Widens Protections for Workers Sensing Bias; State justices rule for a manager who refused to fire a woman seen as not ‘good-looking’ enough”: Maura Dolan has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Woman’s suit against L’Oreal to go to trial; Court rules alleged retaliatory actions a civil rights matter.”

In The Sacramento Bee, legal affairs writer Claire Cooper reports that “State high court widens protection against sex bias.”

And The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Court rules against L’Oreal; Whistleblower’s lawsuit validated.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

In the August 29, 2005 issue of The Nation: Kate Michelman will have an essay entitled “Roberts and Roe.”

And Katha Pollitt will have an essay entitled “Feminists for (Fetal) Life.”

“The Question of Questions…Again: Ask, but don’t expect Judge Roberts to answer every time.” Andrew C. McCarthy has this essay today at National Review Online.

“Arkansas backs Texas’ position on abortion law; Brief supports parental notification”: This article appears today in The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

“State court backs gay rights; Three-judge panel affirms Allentown’s anti-bias ordinance”: The Allentown Morning Call contains this article today. You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Appeals court ruling revives case of intercepted e-mail; Businessman can be tried under wiretap statute”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

“Roberts joined effort to limit voting protections in ’80s; National Archives releases documents from his career at Justice Department”: Joan Biskupic and Toni Locy have this article today in USA Today.

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage and Maura Reynolds today have an article headlined “More Early Roberts Files Are Released; A memo shows that an ’82 high court ruling was at odds with his views on judicial restraint as a Justice Dept. lawyer.”

The Washington Times contains articles headlined “Roberts faulted court in ’82 education case” and “NARAL to pull Roberts TV ad.”

The Chicago Tribune contains articles headlined “On paper, praise for the right” and “Civil rights groups go slow; Leaders say they are withholding judgment as they study Roberts.”

The New York Times contains an article headlined “For Conservative Christians, Game Plan on the Nominee.”

The Washington Post reports that “Abortion Rights Group Withdraws Anti-Roberts Ad; Organization’s Allies Among Critics of NARAL Commercial.”

The Boston Globe reports that “Anti-Roberts ad rapped, withdrawn; Said to distort nominee’s role in clinic bomb case.”

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that “Abortion rights ad assailing Roberts is pulled.”

The Shreveport Times reports that “Coalition, Landrieu express support for court nominee; News conference part of 30-city tour by group concerned with family, life issues.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Roberts Urged Dodging Wallenberg Kin’s Plan.”

In commentary, The St. Petersburg Times contains an editorial entitled “Anti-Roberts ad goes too far.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an editorial entitled “Roberts Nomination: NARAL sinks low in attack ad.”

The Mobile Register contains an editorial entitled “Roberts’ pithy quotes show enduring wisdom.”

The Orlando Sentinel contains an editorial entitled “Down in the gutter: NARAL’s attack on the high court nominee is shameless politics.”

In The Washington Post, columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. has an op-ed entitled “Stop the Roberts Bombing.”

In The Boston Globe, columnist Scot Lehigh has an op-ed entitled “Smearing John Roberts.”

In The Los Angeles Times, columnist Jonathan Chait has an op-ed entitled “Blindly battling over Roberts.”

In The Denver Post, columnist Jim Spencer has an op-ed entitled “Roberts friendly to abortion foes,” while Steven Hill has an op-ed entitled “Time for a fresh look at life terms on the Supreme Court.”

In The Fallon Star Press, Ryan McGinness has an op-ed entitled “It’s confirmed: we don’t know.”

And FindLaw commentator John W. Dean has an essay entitled “Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter Presses Judge John Roberts on His Commerce Clause Views: Will The ‘Ginsburg Rule’ Apply?”