On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Inside the Sentencing Phase of Death-Penalty Trials“; “Trial Latest Example of Government Incompetence“; and “Enron Whistleblower Testifies Against Ex-Chairman” (RealPlayer required).

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Justice Ginsburg Says Death Threat Fueled by Dispute Over International Law.”

And in news from Texas, “Former Enron VP: Vinson & Elkins Didn’t Fully Investigate Accounting Irregularities.”

“Judges Judging Judges, Quite Judiciously”: Quin Hillyer has this essay online today at The American Spectator.

“Souter’s home stays safe”: The Concord (N.H.) Monitor today contains an article that begins, “Somewhere in Washington, U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter may have breathed a sigh of relief last night. Voters in his hometown of Weare voted emphatically to direct town officials not to seize his house by eminent domain.”

“Ohio House OKs ban on pregnancy disputes”: The Columbus Dispatch today contains an article which reports that “Ten days after the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that parents of children with birth defects can sue doctors for failing to identify the abnormalities during pregnancy, the House approved a bill that would ban such lawsuits. The bill now goes to Gov. Bob Taft, who is expected to sign it.”

My earlier coverage of that ruling can be accessed here and here.

“Should campaign-finance laws apply to blogs? Congress votes this week on a bill that would exempt blogs from regulation; Critics see a soft-money loophole.” This article will appear Thursday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“O’Connor’s warning”: This editorial appears today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Justice Ginsburg Reveals Details of Threat”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Judiciary Asks Congress to Tread Carefully with Sentencing”: The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts issued this news release today. The prepared text of testimony that U.S. District Judge Paul G. Cassell of the District of Utah will deliver tomorrow to the House Judiciary Committee‘s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security can be accessed here.

Judge Cassell’s “Statement of the Judicial Conference,” in footnote 13, calls Law Professor Doug Berman’s “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog an “excellent and indispensable website.”

In news from Kansas: The Topeka Capital-Journal reports today that “Amendment would limit court; Measure asserts that no other branch can direct spending of Legislature.”

And The Kansas City Star reports today that “Legislation would limit Supreme Court action.”

Men wearing thong underwear (and nothing else) retain no civil rights: Shannon P. Duffy of The Legal Intelligencer provides a news update headlined “Thong-Wearing Protestors Lose Civil Suit Against State Troopers.”

You can access Monday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this link. The opinion begins, “In July, 2004, Plaintiffs — a small group of young men — protested against President Bush’s visit to Lancaster County, Pennsylvania by stripping down to thong underwear and climbing onto each other’s backs.”

“Slate’s Jurisprudence: Moussaoui Trial Under Cloud.” This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

“Claude Allen’s Mentor: Shoplifting and Bushonomics.” Jacob Weisberg today has this essay online at Slate.

Dear prison diary: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit yesterday issued an interesting decision (posted online today) recognizing that “An inmate does not, however, knowingly waive an attorney-client privilege with respect to documents retained in her cell simply because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in those documents for Fourth Amendment purposes.”

“Congressman to Seek New Sentencing Rules”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

At the “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Doug Berman has a post titled “Let’s get ready to Booker rumble.”

“SJC says defense must share evidence; Some lawyers warn change is radical”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “A deeply divided Supreme Judicial Court ruled yesterday that prosecutors are entitled to know before trial what evidence criminal defense lawyers plan to use to cross-examine the state’s witnesses, a decision prosecutors say levels the playing field but defense lawyers argue subverts the judicial system.”

You can access yesterday’s 4-3 ruling of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts at this link.

“Justice Ginsburg Acknowledges Death Threat Against Her; Speech in South Africa Cites Her and Former Justice O’Connor as Targets”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this report. The text of the speech can be accessed here.

“Judge deals big setback to Moussaoui prosecutors”: This front page article appears today in The Sacramento Bee. Earlier today, I collected additional coverage here.

In news from South Dakota: The Argus Leader of Sioux Falls today contains an article headlined “Initiative may put abortion to vote; Wisconsin group opposed to ban launches campaign” that begins, “An out-of-state group that opposes South Dakota’s ban of most abortions filed paperwork Tuesday to begin collecting signatures for a referendum vote. If 16,728 signatures are collected by mid-June, South Dakotans would vote Nov. 7 to approve or reject the state abortion law.” You can view the referendum petition at this link.

The Argus Leader also provides a news update headlined “Poll: Most South Dakotans want a statewide vote on abortion ban” that begins, “Seven out of 10 South Dakotans want to vote on the state’s new abortion ban, and 57 percent would vote to overturn the law, according to a survey done for a group that has supported Democratic political candidates.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Group Tries to Delay S.D. Abortion Law.”

In news from Alabama: The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Justice says ACLU true culprit” that begins, “Supreme Court Justice Tom Parker on Tuesday blamed a civil liberties group for the judicial ethics complaint filed against him, calling it retaliation for his career-long stance against abortion, pornography, homosexuality and a proposed tax increase for schools.”

law.com’s Tony Mauro previously covered this matter in an article headlined “Alabama Judge Declares War on U.S. Supreme Court; State justice says colleagues should ‘actively resist’ juvenile death penalty ruling.”

“The Men’s Bill of Rights: No taxation without ejaculation.” Online at Slate, William Saletan has a human nature essay that begins, “A few days ago, the National Center for Men filed suit in Michigan to establish ‘a man’s right to make reproductive choice.'”

“Abortion on the Horizon: Although it won’t topple Roe v. Wade, Gonzales v. Carhart is this year’s abortion case to watch.” Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and Adam White have this essay today online at The Weekly Standard.

“Total Recall: Where’s My Free Lunch?” My “Upon Further Review” column published Monday in The Legal Intelligencer is freely available online at this link. The essay begins, “Now that several months have passed since Pennsylvania voters learned that a statewide judicial retention election actually can be used to remove from office Justices serving on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, it is the perfect time to reflect on the lessons of what happened.” And the recent article from The Harrisburg Patriot-News that I discuss in the essay can be accessed here.

Happy birthday to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: I won’t give away her age (as The AP does here), but Justice Ginsburg is nearly twice as old as “24” actress Kim Raver, who also celebrates a birthday today (and who is more than one-and-a-half times as old as her TV show’s title).

“Prosecutors Hamstrung in Moussaoui Trial”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Prosecutors seeking the death penalty against confessed terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui told a federal judge that it would be a waste of time to continue the trial after key government witnesses were barred from testifying.”

“All’s FAIR in Law and War”: Jack M. Balkin has this post at “Balkinization.” No word yet on whether this is a preview of a forthcoming book titled “What Rumsfeld v. FAIR Should Have Said.”

And “TaxProf Blog” provides a post titled “House Passes Resolution in Support of Solomon Amendment.”

Justice for sale: A Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead doll is now up for auction at eBay. You can access the listing at this link.

“Google’s fate hangs on search ruling; The details of a judge’s order in its dispute with the government could determine the search giant’s growth prospects”: Business 2.0 Magazine provides this report.

“Allison Eid takes seat on state’s high court; Clarence Thomas makes introduction during swearing in”: This article appeared yesterday in The Rocky Mountain News. Additional photos from the event can be accessed via this link.

“Freedom of Speech vs. People’s Supposed Right To Hide Their Past”: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has this interesting post about the dispute that gives rise to the Ninth Circuit‘s order, issued yesterday, certifying questions to the Supreme Court of California. My earlier posts concerning that order can be accessed here and here.

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition“: This morning’s broadcast contained segments entitled “Government Given Until Monday to Rebuild Moussaoui Sentencing Case” and “Judge to Force Google to Surrender Web Data” (RealPlayer required).

“Claude Allen admitted bad exchanges”: This article appears today in The Richmond Times-Dispatch.

And The Associated Press reports that “Ex-Bush Aide Carried Embarrassing Secret.”

“Judge Penalizes Moussaoui Prosecutors by Barring Major Witnesses”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times, which also contains an article headlined “Lawyer Thrust Into Spotlight After Misstep in Terror Case.”

The Washington Post today contains articles headlined “Federal Witnesses Banned in 9/11 Trial; Judge Cites Misconduct By Lawyer; Prosecution Faces Major Setback” and “Government Lawyer’s Error Upsets Families of 9/11 Victims.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Judge Curbs Terror Trial; She won’t allow federal aviation officials to be witnesses in the case against Moussaoui, but will still let prosecutors seek the death penalty.”

USA Today reports that “Moussaoui case suffers deep cut; Prosecution loses key line of attack after lawyer’s apparent misconduct.”

The Washington Times reports that “Moussaoui judge allows option of death penalty.”

And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “Judge bars testimony in Moussaoui death trial; She says instructions from TSA lawyer tainted potential witnesses.”

“Ex-Enron Officer Says He Warned of Shady Partnerships”: The New York Times contains this article today.

The Houston Chronicle today contains articles headlined “Watkins sheds light on saga today; Writer of memo that warned Lay of company’s doom will take the stand” and “3 different takes from 3 former employees.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Enron Witness Tells of Transfer; An ex-risk manager says he was taken out of a key job after he questioned an off-the-books deal.”

And USA Today reports that “Watkins set to take the stand today; Former exec wrote famous Enron memo.”

“Judge Says Google Must Hand Over Search Records; Firm Ordered to Comply With Narrower Subpoena”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

The New York Times reports today that “U.S. Limits Demands on Google.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “U.S. Cuts Back Request for Google Data; Privacy supporters worry as a judge says he may order some search queries be handed over.”

The Chicago Tribune reports that “Feds’ Google search limited; Judge raises concern over scope of request.”

USA Today reports that “Judge may force Google to give up info; Justice scales back request in quest to revive porn law.”

In The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz has an article headlined “Google vs. government: Major dispute defused; Judge poised to require release of some date, not search queries.”

And The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Google must reveal some secrets; Judge rules in case involving Internet privacy but has concerns over divulging too much.”