In the October 17, 2005 issue of The Weekly Standard: Terry Eastland will have an essay entitled “A Faith-Based Nomination: The White House is emphasizing Harriet Miers’s religious views.”

And William Kristol will have an essay entitled “What Is To Be Done? A bad week for the administration–but, in a way, a not-so-bad week for conservatism.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “President Bush Renews Defense of High Court Pick” and “GOP Opposition to Miers Grows.”

“Bush Steadfast in Face of Criticism of Nominee”: This article will appear Saturday in The New York Times.

The Washington Post on Saturday will contain articles headlined “Bush Rejects Calls To Withdraw Miers“; “‘The Right Result’ Was Key to Miers; In Dallas, She Made A Name for Candor“; and “From the Oval Office To the Doghouse; It’s Family Counseling Time for the GOP.”

Knight Ridder Newspapers report that “Loyalty, discretion have helped Miers become Bush’s nominee.”

The Dallas Morning News on Saturday will report that “Bush emphatic, enthusiastic on Miers.”

And today’s broadcast of the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” contained a segment entitled “Debating the Miers nomination” (transcript with link to RealAudio).

Available online fromn law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Debate Intensifies Over Miers’ Qualifications.”

In other news, “Controversy Grows Over Boies Firm, Document Company.”

And Mark V.B. Partridge has an essay entitled “Where Does Roberts Stand on Intellectual Property Issues?”

“Bork calls Miers nomination a ‘disaster’; Former Supreme Court nominee gives take on newest pick for the bench”: MSNBC provides this transcript of an interview conducted earlier today.

“Joan Biskupic’s New SOC Biography”: Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Breyer Offers Advice to Top Court Nominees”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Patriot Act Appeal Fails at Supreme Court”: The AP provides this report. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s in chambers opinion, as Circuit Justice for the Second Circuit, can be accessed at this link.

The Associated Press is reporting: An article headlined “Miers Urged Bush to Overrule Legislature” reports on this letter dated June 11, 1995.

And in somewhat related news, “Christians Worried About Miers’ Beliefs.”

eBay files cert. petition in patent law case: “Future of U.S. Supreme Court Justice bobblehead doll auctions hangs in the balance.” “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” offers a post titled “Case Questioning Patent Injunction Standards Moves Towards Supreme Court.”
Speaking of which….

Available online at Slate: Dahlia Lithwick has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Miers, Miers on the Wall: Harriet Miers as the human Rorschach test.”

Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Harriet’s Man: The Texas judge who is vouching for Miers on Roe.”

William Saletan has a frame game essay entitled “Culture of Litmus: Don’t you dare judge Harriet Miers on abortion.”

And in the podcast category, Andy Bowers has an item titled “The LBJ Tapes: A Crony on the Court? The president taps a friend for the Supreme Court, and we have the tapes!”

My BlackBerry looks concerned: Reuters reports that “US appeals court rejects rehearing of RIM-NTP case.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Court Nixes Full Appeal in Blackberry Suit.”

Allegedly provocative dancer banished, due to her supposedly suggestive moves, from dances held at town’s community center brings federal civil rights claim and wins a portion of her Fourth Circuit appeal from an order dismissing the case: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit can be accessed here.

While the appellate court rules that “recreational dancing is not protected by the First Amendment,” the appellate court nevertheless vacates the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the town on the plaintiff’s class-of-one Equal Protection claim and remands the matter to the trial court for further proceedings.

The majority opinion explains, “According to the Town’s evidence, Willis danced in a sexually provocative manner–gyrating and simulating sexual intercourse with her partner while ‘hunch[ed]’ on the floor. The Town’s evidence indicates that Willis wore very short skirts and would frequently bend over while dancing, exposing her underwear, her buttocks, and her ‘privates.'”

Divided three-judge Second Circuit panel rejects emergency room doctors’ antitrust grievance: The lawsuit was brought by licensed physicians who practice or had practiced emergency medicine throughout the United States even though they did not complete formal residency training programs in that specialty.

Those plaintiffs sued the American Board of Emergency Medicine, the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors, twenty-eight named hospitals, and various individuals now or previously associated with these institutions and organizations, alleging that defendants colluded to restrain trade in connection with the practice of emergency medicine in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and to monopolize or attempt to monopolize the market for ABEM-certified and -eligible doctors in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

Today, the Second Circuit ruled by a 2-1 vote, in an opinion you can access here, that plaintiffs lack antitrust standing to pursue the lawsuit.

That didn’t take long: On Monday, The Boston Globe contained an article headlined “Court tackles selection of juries; African-Americans underrepresented” that begins, “A federal appeals court in Boston is set to hear arguments today on a long-simmering issue that has galvanized legal and advocacy groups throughout the state: the lack of African-Americans on federal juries.”

Today, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued this decision in the case. In a nutshell, today’s ruling declares unlawful this particular trial judge’s efforts to increase African-American representation in the jury pool.

The first published order of the U.S. Supreme Court in which Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. participated: You can access it here. In related news, The Associated Press reports that “‘Gangsta rap’ killer executed for trooper’s death; Trial attorneys had argued that anti-police music led to the slaying.”

“Judge Not: Miers is a crony, but she could still be a good justice.” Also in the October 17, 2005 issue of The New Republic, Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen will have this essay (pass-through link).

“Does Pot Lead to Suicide for Supreme Court Justices? Vague Commerce Clause precedents give free rein to personal preferences.” Jacob Sullum has this essay online today at Reason.

“Welcome to the Hackocracy: The New Republic has scoured the Bush administration to find the next Michael Brown; We found the 15 Bush bureaucrats you should worry about.” This article will appear in the October 17, 2005 issue of The New Republic. And topping the list at number one (scroll down) just so happens to be a person nominated earlier this week to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The Blogosphere and the Meirs Nomination”: Hugh Hewitt offers these thoughts today at his blog.

Blogads utilized to market book written by U.S. Supreme Court Justice: Scroll down this page to see. Pretty cool!

“Kansas Supreme Court Ousts County Judge”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday ousted a county judge for viewing Internet pornography on his office computer.” You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Kansas at this link. Proving, once again, that judges shouldn’t view porn at work except when their job requires it.

“Bush predicts Miers will be confirmed to court”: Reuters provides this report.

And Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Bush: Miers Will Be Confirmed to Top Court.”

A transcript of President Bush’s remarks this morning can be accessed here.

“SJC hears challenge to marriage law; State ‘turned on a dime,’ plaintiffs say of 1913 law”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts reports today that “Gay couples challenge old state law.”

And The Boston Herald today contains an editorial entitled “Protect marriage here, elsewhere.”

What she meant to say was Warren [sic] H. Rehnquist, Warren [sic] Scalia, and Warren [sic] Thomas: “Underneath Their Robes” offers a post titled “Harriet Miers: ‘Mmm… Burger…’”

“Justice Grows to the Left”: At “IntentBlog,” Deepak Chopra today has a post that begins, “When Pres. Bush tried to assure his right-wing base that Harriet Miers would not change her judicial philosophy for the next twenty years, he made a horrifying promise.”

Sixth Circuit judges, when in dissent from en banc dispositions, apparently find it difficult not to complain about the composition of the en banc court: Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued this order on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court in Abdur’Rahman v. Bell.

The second page of today’s order consists of a dissent in which five Sixth Circuit judges have joined. The second to last paragraph of the dissent states:

Although not a point of dissent with the majority’s order, we must also raise a procedural question with the composition of our en banc court in light of our two newest members. This case was originally heard by an en banc panel on December 3, 2003. Since that date, we have welcomed two new members to the Court, Judges McKeague and Griffin. These two new members were a part of the en banc Court which voted on this order. It seems counter-intuitive that a case that has already come before this Court as an en banc proceeding should have the composition of that court altered during the appeals process because of these additions while the case was under consideration by the Supreme Court. At this point, our statutes and rules of procedure leave this question unanswered and, after this order, it remains so.

Apparently turnabout is fair play.

“Harriet Miers: The Recusal Question.” Emily Messner has this post today at The Washington Post’s “The Debate” blog.

“Supreme Court road to mediocrity”: Law Professor David Stras, who clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, has this op-ed today in The Minneapolis Star Tribune.

“Miers’ Wealth Declined Due to Mother’s Care, Church Donations”: This post appears today at “TaxProf Blog.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Santorum Says Little on Miers Nomination” and “Singapore Jails Bloggers for Racist Speech.”

“Faith and Supreme Court Nominee Harriet Miers”: This segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition.”

Laugh and the world laughs with you; Cry and be viewed as an inflexible, hard-core conservative: Given the Sturm und Drang that President Bush’s nomination of Harriet E. Miers for the U.S. Supreme Court has precipitated, perhaps on a Friday it would be worthwhile to try for a laugh.

Readers are invited to submit attempts at humor in response to the question:

Why did President Bush nominate Harriet E. Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court?

Here are a few feeble early attempts at humor:

• Because neither John Kerry nor Al Gore would have.
• Because she was the best person he could find for the job.
• Because she convinced him it would assure support from the spinster demographic when he ran for a third term as President in 2008.

Readers who wish to submit their own attempts at humor in response to this question are invited to do so via email.

“‘Legislating from the Bench'”: Law Professor Cass Sunstein has this interesting post at the “University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog.”

“Opening Arguments, Endlessly”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Inside every lawyer, it is said, there is a brilliant writer, held back by professional ambition or by fear of failure. Nowhere is that truism more evident than in the explosion of online blogs by, for and about lawyers.”