“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?”

“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.”

“Roberts Only Represents Playboy for the Articles”: “Wonkette” has this post concerning today’s news from Human Events Online.

“Calif. Supreme Court to Decide Statute in Tobacco Case”: law.com provides this report.

“Reagan Library to Open Additional Records Relating to Judge John Roberts”: National Archives Public Affairs Office issued this press release today.

“Friendly Fire: How John Roberts differs from his hero and mentor.” Robert Gordon has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Letter from Sen. Specter”: NARAL Pro-Choice America issued this press release late today. You can view the letter to which the press release responds at this link.

“Nominee’s Record May Hint at Role on Supreme Court”: This evening’s broadcast of the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” contained this very interesting segment (transcript with link to audio).

“Calif court lets stand $50 million tobacco verdict”: Reuters provides this report.

The Associated Press is reporting: Jesse J. Holland reports that “Abortion Rights Group Withdraws Roberts Ad.”

And in other news, “Intercepted E-Mail Indictment Revived.”

Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained a segment entitled “Released Papers Show Roberts Urging Discretion.”

And today’s broadcast of “Talk of the Nation” contained a segment entitled “Ad Attacks Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts” (featuring David G. Savage).

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

The wire services are reporting: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Specter Calls for Pulling Anti-Roberts Ad.”

And Reuters reports that “Cuba says US illegally holding five accused spies.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) asks NARAL Pro-Choice America to pull its anti-Roberts television ad: Senator Specter sent this letter to NARAL’s president today.

“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.”

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini reports that “Roberts advised O’Connor to be discreet at hearing.”

And an article headlined “U.S. appeals court sends Accupril patent case back” reports on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Roberts Speech Lauds ‘Dispassionate’ Judiciary“; “Sen. John Cornyn on Roberts’ Wake Forest Speech“; and “Slate’s Jurisprudence: Impact of Roberts’ Speech” (featuring Dahlia Lithwick). You can hear the complete forty-five minute speech by clicking here. RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“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.”

“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).

“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.

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.

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.”