“Specter Seeks Another Roberts-Like Nominee”: Hope Yen of The Associated Press provides this report.

And The AP reports from Maine that “Collins to back Supreme Court nominee.”

“A New Chief Justice: Confirm John Roberts.” This editorial appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Too Much of a Mystery”: The New York Times today contains an editorial that begins, “John Roberts failed to live up to the worst fears of his critics in his confirmation hearings last week.”

The Washington Post, meanwhile, today contains an editorial entitled “Confirm John Roberts.” Also today, columnist David S. Broder has an op-ed entitled “Roberts’s Sterling Showing,” while yesterday columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. had an op-ed entitled “The Case For a ‘No’ Vote on Roberts.”

“As Chief, Roberts Would Be Tested”: Charles Lane will have this article Sunday in The Washington Post.

“Oliver Wendell Roberts: In a less nasty age, he’d be confirmed 100-0.” This editorial appears today in the inaugural Saturday edition of The Wall Street Journal.

The Oregonian today contains an editorial entitled “Cameras in the high court: If John Roberts becomes chief justice, he should lead an effort to allow television cameras in the Supreme Court.”

And today in The Los Angeles Times, Rosa Brooks has an op-ed entitled “Liberals, pick another battle.”

“The New Boss: What does it take to be a great chief justice?” Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen will have this essay in tomorrow’s issue of The New York Times Magazine.

Now that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist bobblehead dolls are selling for more than $1,000 each (see here and here), we await the emergence of hard-working, profit-motivated George Mason University Law School students willing to redeem certificates for Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead dolls and ship them to far-flung Green Bag subscribers: One can only hope that enterprising law school students at George Mason will see the potential for profit in helping Green Bag subscribers from across the country redeem their certificates for Justice Scalia bobblehead dolls. Even a $50.00 service fee per doll — a price that would include packing and shipping by a safe and reliable method — would be sure to net a substantial profit to some student or group of students willing to offer this valuable service.

“Next Debate: Must Future Court Nominees Match Qualifications of Roberts?” Sunday’s edition of The New York Times will contain This article.

“Lafave’s attorney tries to block photos; Detectives took intimate photographs of the ex-teacher accused of sex with a student”: This article appeared Wednesday in The St. Petersburg Times.

Yesterday, SPTimes columnist Sue Carlton had an op-ed entitled “Photographs of Lafave: too much information.”

And today, the newspaper contains an editorial entitled “The Lafave photos.”

“Judge’s order blocks Missouri abortion law; Ruling says restrictions threaten Springfield clinic”: The Kansas City Star contains this article today.

And The St. Louis Post-Dispatch provides articles headlined “Federal judge blocks new abortion law” and “New Missouri abortion law targets Granite City clinic.”

You can access at this link yesterday’s temporary restraining order of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

“The Supreme Court’s Biggest Question”: This article will appear in the Week in Review section of Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.

In news from Connecticut: The Hartford Courant today contains an article headlined “Rell Forces Withdrawal Of Eviction Notices” that begins, “Gov. M. Jodi Rell forced the New London Development Corp. on Friday to rescind eviction notices served on residents whose homes were taken by eminent domain.”

And The Day of New London contains articles headlined “NLDC Rescinds Fort Trumbull Eviction Notices; Board says it has faith in leadership of Joplin, Goebel” and “Passions Still Running Deep, Divided On Issue Of Eminent Domain; Fort Trumbull case discussed at Hartford forum.”

“Under Din of Abortion Debate, an Experience Shared Quietly”: This lengthy article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

In news from Canada: The Toronto Star late last night posted online a news update headlined “Ruling protects free speech on Net, lawyers say” that begins, “In a decision hailed as a victory for freedom of expression, an appeal court has thrown out a lawsuit brought by a former United Nations official trying to sue the Washington Post in Ontario over stories published three years before he moved to the province – and where the newspaper had just seven subscribers.” You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Court of Appeal for Ontario at this link.

And from the “We’re not in Alabama any more” file, The Toronto Globe and Mail reports today that “Sex toys coming soon to drugstore near you.” The following appears at the end of the article, “‘Canadians are progressive, but we have our limits,’ Mr. Silverburg said. ‘I don’t know if people will want to see dildos on the shelves beside the shampoo.'”

“Conservative leaders who gave Specter a hard time change their tune after his handling of Roberts hearings”: This article appears today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

“U.S. Supreme Court Justice Souter visits his former court”: The Associated Press provides this report from Concord, New Hampshire. Today Justice David H. Souter celebrates his 66th birthday (second to last item).

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Guessing Games in Wake of Roberts Hearings.”

And in related coverage, “As Roberts Hearings Conclude, the Importance of a Second Vacancy Rises.”

“On Abortion, Few Seem to Take Roberts at Face Value; Nominee’s Testimony Discounted by Groups On Both Sides of Issue”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

And in somewhat related news, The New York Times reports today that “As His Opponent Gains Support, Bloomberg Withholds Some.”

“Bush to Meet With Senators Over Second Vacancy on Court”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “President Bush plans to meet Wednesday with Republican and Democratic Senate leaders about filling the Supreme Court vacancy created by the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Senate aides from both parties said.”

Dare I say this is crazy? $2,151.99 was the winning bid on eBay early this morning for a Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist bobblehead doll.

“Senators talk politics, while Roberts focuses on law”: Stephen Henderson of Knight Ridder Newspapers provides this report.

Bidding on Chief Justice Rehnquist bobblehead doll reaches $810.00: My earlier coverage is here. The auction will end at 1:27 a.m. eastern time Saturday morning.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are reports headlined “Prosecutors Appeal Patriot Act Gag Ruling” and “Feds to Retry Miss. Lawyer, Ex-Judges.”

“Man ruled legal father of in vitro babies; Court finds he’s more than sperm donor, must pay child support”: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer contains this article today.

And The Seattle Times reports today that “Support is ordered for in vitro children.”

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

“New abortion law brings immediate response”: This article appears today in The St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

And The Kansas City Star reports today that “Lawsuits test Missouri on abortion restrictions; Law aimed at those who help teens go out of state.”

“Wearing the Right to Free Speech on Her Sleeve”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “Mary Beth Tinker looks like an ordinary, middle-aged woman. Nothing about her subdued clothing, hairstyle or mannered demeanor suggests she’s an answer on law school exams. Except for the black armband.”

“Bloomberg opposes Roberts’ nomination”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Friday opposed John Roberts’ nomination to be U.S. Supreme Court chief justice, making him the first noted Republican to break with the Bush administration over who should lead America’s top court.”

“Roberts’ Confirmation Virtually Assured”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

Bidding on Chief Justice Rehnquist bobblehead doll reaches $660: My earlier coverage is here. The auction will end at 1:27 a.m. eastern time Saturday morning. Whether I’m still awake at that ungodly hour tonight to live-blog the outcome of the auction remains to be seen.

Divided three-judge Federal Circuit panel gets exercised over exercise equipment patent dispute: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued this opinion today. “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” covers the ruling in a post humorously titled “Open Claim Language Saves Patentee From Disclaimer.”

Three-judge Eleventh Circuit panel issues opinion on petition for rehearing in Michael B. Price v. Time, Inc.: Today’s opinion, by Circuit Judge Ed Carnes, begins:

The opinion we issued in this case requires Price, as a condition for a disclosure order, to depose four women one of whom probably is the confidential source for the article that gave rise to this lawsuit. Price v. Time, Inc., 416 F.3d 1327, 1347 (11th Cir. 2005). In imposing that requirement, we took into account this assurance given to us by counsel for the defendants: if the woman who is the confidential source testified during her deposition that she was not the source, counsel would “do his duty as an officer of the court and inform the district court that the witness’ sworn denial was false.” Id. That is the commitment counsel made to us during oral argument.

The defendants have filed a petition for rehearing requesting that we delete from our opinion any suggestion that their counsel is obligated to inform the court if the woman whose identity as the confidential source they and he have been protecting falsely denies under oath that she is the source. They take the position that a lawyer has no obligation to inform the court if a witness, other than his own client, has lied under oath. They insist that it is the perfect prerogative of an officer of the court to stand silently by as the search for truth is led astray by perjury—assuming, of course, that the perjury serves his client’s interests.

That is an interesting position.

The panel’s original opinion is here, and my coverage of it is here.

“The issue of the admissibility of evidence concerning the absence of prior accidents presents recurring difficulties in product liability cases”: A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit today issued a decision in which it took the “opportunity to provide the district courts with guidance concerning the foundation that must be laid by a product liability defendant who seeks to introduce testimony concerning the non-occurrence of prior accidents.”

“Yahoo Flap in China May Be Harbinger”: Today in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article that begins, “The flap over Yahoo’s involvement in the jailing of a Chinese journalist is likely to be the harbinger of a coming wave of ethical quandries for American technology companies who have rushed to grab a share of China’s burgeoning market, according to China experts and human rights advocates.”

In earlier coverage, c|net News.Com reported that “Group says Yahoo helped jail Chinese journalist.”

The Times of London reported that “Yahoo! ‘helped to jail journalist’” and “Yahoo! on defensive over jailed Chinese journalist” and published an essay by Dominic Rushe entitled “Yahoo’s serious failure to stand up to Chinese censors.”

BBC News reported that “Firms face moral dilemma in China.”

Forbes.com published an essay by Greg Levine entitled “Did Semel’s Yahoo! Help Beijing Jail Reporter?”

And The Sydney Morning Herald on Monday of this week reported that “Web firm admits aid to censors.”

Good morning, Ninth Circuit: As first noted here late last night, in today’s edition of The Recorder of San Francisco, attorney Cyrus Sanai has an interesting essay entitled “Taking the Kozinski Challenge” that begins, “The fiercest battle within the federal appellate courts these days is not over abortion or gay marriage, but the arcane question of whether an attorney may cite the unpublished case law of an appellate court as the binding law of the circuit.”

“Roberts Shows Some Openness; Nominee Hints at Judicial Approach, Says He Isn’t an Ideologue”: Jess Bravin and Jeanne Cummings have this article (pass-through link) today in The Wall Street Journal.