“Kissing Sibs: Could the Supreme Court embrace incest?” Matthew J. Franck has this essay today at National Review Online.

In news from Mississippi: The Biloxi Sun Herald today contains an article headlined “Judge issues jury instructions; 4-hour litany bores some, thrills others” that begins, “A crowd materialized Wednesday for the final showdown between U.S. prosecutors and four men accused of judicial bribery.” And a related article is headlined “A legal eye: Judicial performance, ethics could come into play regardless of verdict in judicial bribery trial.”

In other coverage, The Clarion-Ledger reports today that “Cases could turn on verdict; Insurance firm could benefit in bribery case involving Diaz, Minor.”

“Appeals court upholds voiding divorce decree”: The Associated Press reports here that “In a case that outraged women’s-rights groups and prompted a change in state law, an appeals court has sided with a Spokane judge who vacated a woman’s divorce because she was pregnant.”

You can access Tuesday’s ruling of the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington at this link.

In today’s issue of The New York Times: An article reports that “Civil Liberties Union Prepares Lawsuit Challenging Random Searches of Bags on Subways.”

And in other news, “Congress Passes Bill Nullifying a State Law, and Making It Easier to Lease Cars in New York.”

“Roberts Donated Help to Gay Rights Case; In 1996, activists won a landmark anti-bias ruling with the aid of the high court nominee”: Richard A. Serrano has this article today in The Los Angeles Times. And Maura Reynolds reports that “Nominee Admits He Registered as Lobbyist.”

Today in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article headlined “The Case of the Nazi Propagandist” that begins, “As a young but trusted legal lieutenant at the Justice Department in the early 1980s, Judge John Roberts Jr. was assigned some of the agency’s most politically sensitive duties, including fielding the requests of conservative heavyweights who sought to exert influence in ongoing cases.”

Newsday reports that “Roberts makes a correction” and “Abortion still supported; Despite decades of debate on subject, Pew poll shows majority of Americans endorse it, with restrictions.”

The Washington Times reports that “Abortion backers fear ‘hostile’ Roberts.”

The Richmond Times-Dispatch contains an article headlined “Allen to Roberts: ‘Watch out for those … blocks’; The talk includes football as Virginia senator meets and praises court nominee.”

The Bozeman Daily Chronicle reports that “Supreme Court battle comes to Montana.”

The Stanford Daily reports that “Law prof. weighs in on Supreme Court nominee.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Roberts Backed Plan to Restrict U.S. Sex Discrimination Law.”

In commentary, The Charlotte Observer contains an editorial entitled “Unsettling the law: Of course U.S. Supreme Court can overturn precedents.”

In The Chicago Tribune, columnist Steve Chapman has an op-ed entitled “Who’s the extremist on Roe vs. Wade?”

In The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, columnist Linda Campbell has an op-ed entitled “A mystery set in Washington.”

In The Providence (R.I.) Journal, columnist M. Charles Bakst has an op-ed entitled “Judging Bush’s nominee to high court.”

In The Baltimore Sun, Michael Comiskey has an op-ed entitled “The case for grilling Roberts.”

In The Seattle Times, Julia K. Stronks has an op-ed entitled “Of course judges shape and build our laws.”

In The Philadelphia Inquirer, Dave Boyer has an op-ed entitled “Who’s ‘fit’ for the high court?”

And FindLaw commentator Vikram David Amar has an essay entitled “It’s the Specifics, Stupid…. A Commentary on The Kind of Substantive Questions the Senate Can and Should Pose to Supreme Court Nominees.”

“N.Va. Jail’s ‘Unassuming’ Celebrity; N.Y. Times Reporter Is Among Many Notables at Alexandria Facility”: This article appears Thursday in The Washington Post.

And in news relating to the pending U.S. Supreme Court nomination, “They’re Fishing on the Hill, but It’s No Vacation.”

“Roberts Worked on Behalf of Gay Activists”: Thursday’s issue of The Los Angeles Times will contain an article that begins, “Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. worked behind the scenes for a coalition of gay-rights activists, and his legal expertise helped them convince the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling protecting people against discrimination because of their sexual orientation.”

“Georgia High Court Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears”: Yesterday’s broadcast of NPR‘s “News & Notes with Ed Gordon” contained this interesting interview (RealPlayer required) with the new Chief Justice of Georgia.

“Former President Clinton Says Roberts Very Impressive”: Bloomberg News provides this report.

“The Roberts Memos and the Future”: Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog” provides this commentary.

“Hawaiian-Only School Policy Struck Down”: law.com provides this report.

“Roberts Helped to Shape 80’s Civil Rights Debate”: This article will appear Thursday in The New York Times.

And Thursday’s issue of The Washington Post will report that “Democrats to Compare Roberts’s Views Now, Then; Some Senators See Discrepancies in Roberts’s Statements Now Vs. in Years Past.”

“Senate Democrats Question Roberts’ Pledge”: Hope Yen of The Associated Press provides this report.

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Court Rules Against Hawaii School Policy” and “Getting Emotional Over the High Court” (RealPlayer required).

“The Souter Factor: What makes tough conservative justices go soft?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Divided en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit rejects argument that U.S. citizens residing in Puerto Rico have a right to vote for President and Vice President of the United States under either the U.S. Constitution or U.S. treaty obligations: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

“John Roberts and Institutional Reform Litigation”: Law Professor Sam Bagenstos has this post at the Think Progress “Supreme Court Extra” blog.

In Thursday’s issue of The Christian Science Monitor: Tomorrow’s newspaper will contain articles headlined “A judicial think tank – or a plot?” and “On Indian land, a twist on church vs. state; As US agencies and courts declare sites as holy ground, critics charge the government is establishing religion.”

“Americans Want to Know: Will Judge John Roberts Uphold Protections for Women’s Health and Safety? New Research Shows the Next Supreme Court Justice Must Support Privacy and Access to Reproductive Health Care.” Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. has issued this press release today.

“In this case we consider the applicability of the ‘state secrets doctrine’ to a Title VII racial discrimination claim brought against the Director of Central Intelligence and ten unnamed CIA employees by a CIA covert agent.” So begins an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued today. The plaintiff appears to be covert no more, however, as the opinion identifies him by name.

“Abortion and Rights of Terror Suspects Top Court Issues; Strong Support for Stem Cell Research”: The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press today issued this summary of findings of a poll that the organization conducted. Additional information can be accessed here, here, and here.

In news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Poll Examines Supreme Court Priorities.”

And the winner is? I plan to post online tomorrow morning the results of my recent “Most dumb-ass question for Judge Roberts” contest. That will give the nominee just over a month to have answers prepared for when he begins testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Pryor touts: The Birmingham News reports today that “Pryor touts Roberts for high court.”

And The Mobile Register reports today that “Pryor touts reform of sentencing.”

“Kamehameha will fight ruling; Its admission policy is ‘unlawful race discrimination,’ a federal court rules; The plaintiffs’ attorneys say they will ensure the school obeys the order”: This article appears today in The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, along with articles headlined:

• “Decision saddens students who support preference policy“;
• “Activists fear ripple effect for Hawaiian issues“;
• “Akaka undeterred by ruling; The court decision does not exclude federal recognition of Hawaiians, the U.S. senator says“; and
• “UH officials say Hawaiian waivers will continue.”

And The Honolulu Advertiser today contains articles headlined:

• “Hawaiians-first policy rejected“;
• “Ruling evokes anger, tears from Kamehameha ‘ohana“;
• “Akaka bill backers, foes weigh ruling“; and
• “OHA, Hawaiian Home Lands fate uncertain.”

Yesterday’s ruling by a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit can be accessed at this link.

“Court OKs Blocking of Unsolicited E-Mails”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Roberts Presents Measured Picture To Senate Panel”: Jess Bravin and David Rogers have this article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Phillip Johnson’s Assault Upon Faith-Based Darwinism: A modern monkey trial isn’t what Phillip Johnson expected when he wrote a critique of evolution that launched intelligent design — or was it?” This lengthy article appears in the current issue of East Bay Express.

The New York Times today reports that “Bush Remarks Roil Debate on Teaching of Evolution.”

The Washington Post today contains a front page article headlined “Bush Remarks On ‘Intelligent Design’ Theory Fuel Debate.”

The Los Angeles Times contains an article headlined “Inspiration for Doubters of Darwin; Bush appears to give moral support to the ‘intelligent design’ camp by again backing public schools’ teaching of an alternative to evolution.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “Bush says all theories of life have place in classroom; He suggests that children should be taught more than evolution, but it is the schools’ choice.”

Financial Times reports that “Bush wants alternatives to Darwinism taught in school.”

The York (Pa.) Daily Record contains articles headlined “Bush adds to evolution buzz; The Dover school board has ‘powerful friends in Washington,’ its attorney joked” and “Reporters can be questioned; A judge said the two can be deposed in the Dover case.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Reporters Can Keep Notes and E-mails in ‘Creationism’ Trial.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Roberts Documents Provide Sweeping View of Career” and “Jailed Reporter Miller Described as Risk Taker” (RealPlayer required).

“Judges can get parties’ support; Federal court strikes down state election rule”: This article appears today in The St. Paul Pioneer Press.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports today that “Court lets politics into judge’s races.”

And Minnesota Public Radio reports that “Ruling ushers in new era of judicial elections.”

The Associated Press is reporting: An article reports that “Roberts Puts Net Worth at $5.3 Million.” You can see for yourself here.

And in other news, “Gay-Marriage Ban Group Sues Calif. AG.”

“Roberts Sees Limited High Court Role on Social Issues”: Josh Gerstein has this article today in The New York Sun.

In USA Today, Kathy Kiely and Joan Biskupic have an article headlined “Documents reveal Roberts’ wealth, philosophy.” And James P. Gannon has an op-ed entitled “A religious test? Let’s not; Yes, John Roberts is Catholic; But to allow his views on faith to become fair game in Senate confirmation hearings would set a dangerous and divisive precedent.”

The Washington Post reports that “Judges Should Have ‘Limited’ Role, Roberts Says; Statement to Panel Cites Need for Restraint on Bench; Prior Documents Question ‘Right to Privacy.’”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage and Maura Reynolds have an article headlined “High Court Nominee Sides With Restraint; John G. Roberts Jr., answering a Senate questionnaire, describes his judicial philosophy as one based on precedent, not activism.” And Law Professor Richard L. Hasen has an op-ed entitled “Roberts’ iffy support for voting rights.”

The Baltimore Sun reports that “Importance of precedent emphasized by Roberts; Supreme Court nominee offers glimpse of philosophy in Senate questionnaire; Calls criticism of judicial activism ‘well-founded.’”

Newsday reports that “Roberts omits stint with cosmetics group.”

The Boston Globe reports that “Roberts tells senators he would respect precedent; He also vows to avoid legislating on bench.”

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains articles headlined “Nominee Roberts cites value of ‘modesty and humility’; Response to Judiciary Committee also lists financial holdings” and “Roberts seen as skeptical on broad discrimination rules.”

The Washington Times reports that “Role of judges ‘limited,’ Roberts says.”

The Hill reports that “Dems weigh how Roberts vote will play.”

And The State of Columbia, South Carolina contains an article headlined “Critics warm to Graham; Senator takes on filibuster issue at luncheon.”

Meanwhile, in commentary, Brian Dickerson has an op-ed headlined “A fifth vote against U-M?” in The Detroit Free Press.

“Eminent-Domain Uproar Imperils Projects”: The Wall Street Journal contains this article (free access) today.

And USA Today contains articles headlined “States move to protect property; Ruling prompts bills on eminent domain” and “For N.J. family, ruling may doom beach cottage; City wants to demolish it for luxury condos.”

“Lawyers Seek New Legal Protections for Reporters; Attorneys for Post Journalist Liken Link With Sources to That of Therapist, Patient”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Court Finds Bias in Policy of Schools for Hawaiians”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

“Faithful Furious Over Tactic; Catholics express shock over lawyer’s arguments that a woman who sued Portland archdiocese for child support should have used birth control”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.