Greetings from Lansing, Michigan: Where earlier this evening, I had the pleasure of visiting the building that serves as the headquarters of the Supreme Court of Michigan.

Programming note: I’ll be en route this afternoon to Lansing, Michigan, where tomorrow I’ll be at The Thomas M. Cooley Law School to give a noontime speech to that law school’s Federalist Society chapter. Additional posts should appear online later today.

Sixth Circuit refuses to recognize First Amendment right to confront Transportation Security Administration airport passenger security screeners with loud and profane language and belligerent conduct: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit can be accessed at this link. Not that I’ve ever had this problem in the past, but this ruling conveniently issues a day before I’m scheduled to pass-through a Sixth Circuit-based airport security checkpoint on my trip home tomorrow from Lansing, Michigan.

“Feinstein Says She Will Vote ‘No’ on Roberts”: The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article headlined “Roberts’ ruling in Bush’s favor debated; Terrorism case came as White House was interviewing him.”

And The Sacramento Bee reports today that “Democratic leaders split on Roberts vote; The senators must make a difficult political calculation.”

“Lockyer defends state’s ban to appeals court”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Study Finds Racial Imbalance on Death Row”: David Kravets of The Associated Press provides this report.

And Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, reports that “Study ties death sentences to victim’s race; Killers of whites are more likely to face capital punishment in state, report finds.”

“Feinstein to Vote Against Roberts”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Roberts’s Responses May Further Add to Debate”: Today in The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Jeanne Cummings have an article (pass-through link) that begins, “Chief justice nominee John Roberts, who gained a law-and-order reputation as deputy solicitor general and federal circuit judge, cast doubt on a 1958 Supreme Court precedent that underpins recent rulings finding the execution of juvenile offenders and the mentally retarded to be unconstitutional.”

Access the agenda for today’s executive business meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee: At the mark-up this morning, the Judiciary Committee is expected to favorably report to the full U.S. Senate the nomination of John G. Roberts, Jr. to be Chief Justice of the United States.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. eastern time, and C-SPAN3 will provide live coverage (RealPlayer and Windows Media Player).

“Stars off the bench: 3 women judges are a stellar monument to judicial independence.” The Arizona Republic today contains an editorial that begins, “Monday’s constellation of women judges at ASU’s College of Law was the kind of celebrity show that should, but didn’t, attract hordes of screaming fans and autograph hunters. Judge groupies? Silly idea? We don’t think so.”

“Chief Justice Vote Splits Top Democrats; Judiciary Committee member Patrick Leahy says he’ll vote for John G. Roberts Jr.; The party has no unified strategy on the nomination”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

In The Chicago Tribune, Jan Crawford Greenburg reports today that “Bush weighs political pros, cons of O’Connor’s successor.”

USA Today reports that “Key Democrat voices support for Roberts; Senators focus on second vacancy.”

Charlie Savage of The Boston Globe reports that “Leahy, in surprise, voices support for Roberts; Kennedy, Kerry oppose court pick.”

Luiza Ch. Savage, writing in Mcleans, has an article headlined “‘Judges are like umpires’; The John Roberts hearings prove to be downright civilized.”

The New York Sun reports that “Leahy Set to Back Judge Roberts For High Court.”

The Washington Times reports that “Leahy backs Roberts nomination.”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that “Roberts picks up key vote; Democrat praises ‘man of integrity.’”

And The Rocky Mountain News reports that “Salazar unsure on Roberts vote; Both sides lobby Colo. senator; Udall endorses nominee.”

In commentary, USA Today contains an editorial entitled “Despite lingering questions, Roberts merits confirmation; His keen legal mind, genial style a good fit for chief justice post,” while Ralph G. Neas voices a different view in an op-ed entitled “Roberts a dangerous bet; Let’s not risk our constitutional rights on his record, silence.”

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains an editorial entitled “Confirm John Roberts.”

The Palm Beach Post contains an editorial entitled “Put Roberts on court; key choice is next one.”

The Oakland Tribune contains an editorial entitled “Roberts deserves confirmation as chief justice.”

The Indianapolis Star contains an editorial entitled “Roberts earns thumbs-up vote.”

The Washington Times contains an editorial entitled “A legacy moment for Bush.”

The Mobile Register contains an editorial entitled “Reid’s racial remarks went beyond the pale.”

The Birmingham News contains an editorial entitled “Vote on Roberts will tell story.”

The Elmira (N.Y.) Star-Gazette contains an editorial entitled “Judging Mr. Roberts: Court nominee may surprise supporters, opponents once he becomes chief justice.”

And in The Arizona Republic, the confirmation diary entry from U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) published today bears the heading “Leahy’s vote all but cinches OK on Roberts.”

“One nation, under judicial tyranny”: Whitney Blake has this op-ed today in The Cavalier Daily.

“Professors Stand Up To Recruiters; Forty law faculty members file brief opposing military’s presence on campus”: This article appears today in The Harvard Crimson. A link to the brief can be accessed via this earlier post.

“Open up the system: Is Canada so lacking in outstanding jurists that it would suffer from losing the candidacy of those who cannot bear public scrutiny?” Today in The Toronto Star, Peter H. Russell has an op-ed that begins, “The great republic to the south is now engaged in yet another highly visible and political round of filling vacancies on its Supreme Court as the Senate’s Judiciary Committee examines John Roberts.”

“Unpublished rulings no longer out of cite; Unpublished appellate decisions now can be brought into cases”: Josh Richman has this article today in The Oakland Tribune.

“Scopes, 2005: ‘Design’ Theory Faces Legal Test.” This article (free access) appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Chicago attorneys are charged in rape of Wisconsin woman; Bail amounts upset some in community”: The Chicago Tribune today contains an article that begins, “Two attorneys from prominent Chicago law firms are facing rape charges in Wisconsin after an encounter with a 27-year-old woman while on vacation in Green Lake County in August.”

In earlier coverage, The Oshkosh Northwestern published articles headlined “Two charged in Green Lake rape” and “Illinois men appear on rape charges; Accused of assaulting a woman from Berlin.”

“For purposes of Rule 54(b), vagueness and overbreadth are alternative theories underlying a single claim”: Tenth Circuit Judge Michael W. McConnell today issued an interesting decision involving whether a valid partial final judgment existed in a case arising from a First Amendment challenge to a federal Bureau of Prisons regulation providing that inmates may not “act as [a] reporter” or “publish under a byline.”

“HLS Professors file brief in Supreme Court case on military recruiting”: Harvard Law School issued this press release today, and the amicus brief can be accessed here. The law school’s related statement issued yesterday is here.

Fifth Circuit resolves cross-burning insurance coverage dispute: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, overturning a $10 million judgment against the insured, can be accessed at this link.

Available online from The Los Angeles Times: The newspaper’s web site offers news updates headlined “Roberts Convinces Leahy to Vote ‘Yes’“; “Striking Guantanamo Prisoners Seek Court’s Help“; and “‘Clinton,’ ‘Lewinsky’ Brand Condoms Sold in China.”

Not bad, but it’s no Robby Gordon helmet: Bidding at eBay on a Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead doll has reached the triple digits.

“2nd Court Nominee Expected to Endure Heat”: This article will appear Thursday in The Washington Post.

In Thursday’s edition of The New York Times: Tomorrow’s newspaper will contain articles headlined “Focus for Supreme Court Pick Is Said to Be on Diversity” and “Committee’s Top Democrat Will Vote Yes on Roberts,” along with a news analysis headlined “Among Democratic Activists, Little Indecision on Roberts.”

Meanwhile, in other news, an article headlined “A Lion of the Courtroom Hears His Critics Roar” begins, “David Boies is a star in the courtroom, but his back-office operations are causing some headaches. Mr. Boies, who has presented himself as a white knight to troubled companies, has faced criticism in recent weeks over previously undisclosed ties to a document management firm that is partly owned by members of his family. Lawyers in some cases have assailed that relationship, contending that Mr. Boies’s firm faces a conflict of interest when recommending the document management company, Amici, to a client without disclosing the family’s financial interest.” My earlier coverage of this matter can be accessed here and here (final item).

“Experts See Legal Abortion Without Roe”: Jane Roh (yes, that’s apparently her real name) has this report at FOXNews.com.

“Supreme Court’s Ginsburg says at New York lecture ‘any woman will not do'”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg told an audience Wednesday that she doesn’t like the idea of being the only female justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. But in choosing to fill one of the two open positions on the court, ‘any woman will not do,’ she said.”

Brief for Respondents filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court in the Rumsfeld v. FAIR Solomon Amendment case: You can access the Brief for Respondents at this link (very large PDF file). The federal government’s Brief for Petitioners can be accessed here. Many additional amicus briefs can be accessed via the bottom of this web page.

“The Constitutional Moment That Wasn’t: We seem to have avoided an historic Supreme Court revolution — for now.” Law Professor Bruce Ackerman has this essay online today at The American Prospect.

And last Friday, Terence Samuel had an essay entitled “John The Practiced: John Roberts knew exactly what he was doing in the hearings; That shouldn’t leave everybody so comfortable.”

“Democrats revive filibuster threat; Big battle brewing over O’Connor spot on Supreme Court”: Tom Curry, national affairs writer for MSNBC, provides this report.

Steve Holland and Thomas Ferraro of Reuters provide a report headlined “Bush hears warnings about next court nominee” that begins:

U.S. Senate leaders warned President George W. Bush on Wednesday his next Supreme Court nominee will likely face a far more contentious confirmation battle than conservative John Roberts, who is poised to become U.S. chief justice.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, emerged from a White House meeting to say he had advised Bush to hold off on making his second nomination for the court in order to see how Roberts performed as chief justice.

Specter said Bush should ask retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to stay on through the court’s coming October-June term. He said he spoke to her and she agreed to stay if asked.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan made clear Bush would not accept the proposal. He said O’Connor had expressed her desire to retire and Bush would pick her replacement soon.

Bloomberg News reports that “Senator Leahy Backs Roberts to Be U.S. Chief Justice.”

The Associated Press provides reports headlined “NJ senators will vote against Roberts’ confirmation as chief justice” and “Sen. Boxer to oppose Supreme Court nominee Roberts.”

The Hill on Thursday will report that “Leahy will vote ‘yes’ on Roberts.”

And Voice of America News reports that “Senate Panel to Vote on Chief Justice Nominee Thursday.”

“Judge Roberts on Trial”: Law Professor Ronald Dworkin will have this essay in the October 20, 2005 issue of The New York Review of Books.

The Associated Press is reporting: Jesse J. Holland reports that “Roberts Picks Up Democratic Support.”

And in other news, “Chertoff Has Little Room for Error on Rita.”

Just in time for Hurricane Rita, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is again issuing opinions: You can access via this link the opinions that the New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit issued on Monday and Tuesday of this week. The Fifth Circuit is now, of course, temporarily headquartered in Houston, where the the court has already announced its closure on Friday, September 23d in anticipation of Hurricane Rita.

Federal government does not owe compensation for taking of property as the result the federal government’s ongoing prohibition of helicopter traffic in the area of the National Capital, which caused a heliport leasehold to lose all value: A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued this opinion today.

“Judges deciding cases have divergent views; Members sitting on 9th Circuit illustrate divide over ideology”: Howard Mintz had this article in last Friday’s issue of The San Jose Mercury News.

Appellate law blogger’s office relocates to Computer Avenue: The building in which my law firm has been located since I opened my solo appellate boutique in February 2004 was recently sold to a new landlord. As a result, I’m in the midst of overseeing the relocation of my office today from a location five minutes west of my home to a location five minutes east of my home. My new office address, telephone, and telecopy numbers are on display at my law firm’s web site. My email addresses remain unchanged.