“Frist Ready To Tee Up The Next Floor Fight Over Judges”: The Republican National Lawyers Association’s “Judicial Confirmation Blog” links here to an article published yesterday in National Journal’s Congress Daily PM.

“Apple Trade Secrets Case Under Close Examination in Court”: From California, The Recorder provides a report that begins, “A 6th District Court of Appeal panel expressed serious concerns Thursday with Apple Computer’s two-year quest to find out who leaked trade secret information to online blog sites.”

Earlier today, I collected at this link additional press coverage of yesterday’s oral argument.

“Ryan Juror Told Judge of Personal Attacks”: The Associated Press provides this report.

Third Circuit reiterates that its non-precedential opinions aren’t precedent: The discussion appears on pages 16-17 of this precedential opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued today.

“Sixth Circuit Holds Ohio Voting Systems Unconstitutional”: Law Professor Dan Tokaji, co-counsel for the prevailing parties in today’s Sixth Circuit ruling, has this post at his “Equal Vote” blog.

“Court Says Jayson Williams Can Be Retried”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Former NBA star Jayson Williams can be retried on a reckless manslaughter charge stemming from the shooting death of a hired driver at the player’s estate, an appeals court ruled Friday.”

You can access today’s unpublished ruling of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, at this link.

“Islanders Sue U.S. Over Relocation”: Back in December 2001, The Washington Post published a small item that begins, “A group of indigenous people who say they were forced from their archipelago when the United States assumed control of Diego Garcia and the Chagos Islands in the 1960s sued the government in U.S. District Court yesterday, alleging genocide, torture and forced relocation.”

Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of the lawsuit. According to the court’s opinion, written by Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown, “We affirm the district court’s decision, finding that Appellants’ claims present nonjusticiable political questions.”

An internet search led me to this web page, which appears to offer access to the federal district court’s ruling and also to other documents filed in the district court.

“While it is always nice to have one’s law review articles discussed by the courts (that is, after all, one of my main audiences when writing), the dispute between the majority and the dissent over how to best read my conclusions is more heated than I have ever seen.” At his “Election Law” blog, Law Professor Rick Hasen offers these initial thoughts on today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. My earlier coverage of that ruling is here.

“Lawyer dies in Wake court; No defibrillators available on site”: The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina today contains an article that begins, “A lawyer arguing a drunken driving case at the Wake County Courthouse died Thursday, apparently of a heart attack. Tom Farris, 57, a Wilson defense lawyer, collapsed about 11:30 a.m. and died despite efforts to resuscitate him in the courtroom. The courthouse — a weekday gathering place for hundreds — does not have a defibrillator.”

Divided three-judge Sixth Circuit panel invalidates state-election practices on the basis of Bush v. Gore‘s equal protection holding: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit — examining the claim that “the use of unreliable, deficient voting equipment, including the punch card ballot, in some Ohio counties but not other counties violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” — can be accessed here. A law review article about the Bush v. Gore decision by Professor Rick Hasen, author of the “Election Law” blog, receives much attention from both the majority and dissenting opinions.

In this week’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court from the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer“: Wednesday’s broadcast contained a segment entitled “Insanity Defense on Trial” (transcript with links to audio and video).

And Monday’s broadcast contained a segment entitled “Retaliation Case in High Court” (transcript with links to audio and video).

Both segments featured Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal.

“Half-Life: What if Roe is overturned?” Ramesh Ponnuru will have this essay in the May 1, 2006 issue of The New Republic.

“The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review”: Law Professor Jeremy Waldron has this essay in the April 2006 issue of The Yale Law Journal.

“Brown executed for 1983 murder; The execution was to be first to use monitor to measure inmate’s level of consciousness”: The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina contains this article today.

“Which Picture of Skilling Will Enron Jurors Believe?” This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Washington Post today contains an article headlined “Two Takes on Skilling’s Character; Lawyers Probe Enron Chief’s Investments; Witnesses Buttress Defense.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Skilling Lives Up to His Billing.”

USA Today reports that “Skilling’s testimony closes with ex-girlfriend gaffe; Board wasn’t told of deal.”

And The Houston Chronicle contains articles headlined “Skilling laments ‘tough 6 years’; Former CEO ends his testimony by again denying all the allegations” and “How did he do? Experts weigh the effectiveness of Skilling’s demeanor on the witness stand.”

“Prosecutors Concede Doubts About Moussaoui’s Story”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.

The Washington Post reports today that “Moussaoui, Shoe Bomber Link Called ‘Highly Unlikely’ by FBI.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Expert Counters Insanity Claim; Zacarias Moussaoui has a personality disorder but is not schizophrenic, a psychiatrist says in testimony that may help the case for execution.”

And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “Prosecutors doubt claim; Feds have no proof that Moussaoui, Reid conspired before 9/11.”

“U.S. Suffers Setback in Case Of Alleged Enemy Combatant”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “With one of his fellow detainees transferred to a criminal court and another deported to Saudi Arabia, the last man held as an enemy combatant on U.S. soil is poised to take center stage in the ongoing fight over presidential powers in a time of war.”

“Detroit judge is suspended, ordered to see psychiatrist; Ruling stems from 2005 parking flap”: The Detroit Free Press contains this article today.

And The Detroit News reports today that “Court suspends Detroit judge; David Bradfield was subject of many complaints about his tantrums on the bench.”

“Attorney: Case against Convertino undercut; Analysis of photos in terrorism case conflicting, he says; feds say they can show ex-prosecutor lied.” This article appears today in The Detroit News.

And The Associated Press reports that “Bungled Terror Case Taking New Twist.”

“Gonzales calls for mandatory Web labeling law”: Declan McCullagh of c|net News.com provides a report that begins, “Web site operators posting sexually explicit information must place official government warning labels on their pages or be imprisoned for up to 5 years, the Bush administration proposed Thursday.”

“Bush Counsel May Be Next in Shake-Up”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Joshua B. Bolten, the new White House chief of staff, has raised the possibility of moving Harriet E. Miers from her job as President Bush’s counsel as part of a continuing shake-up of the West Wing, an influential Republican with close ties to Mr. Bolten said Thursday.”

“Rosemead recall has new legal life”: The Whittier Daily News today contains an article that begins, “An effort to recall Mayor Gary Taylor and Councilman Jay Imperial could be revived because a court decision Thursday undermines Imperial’s legal challenge to the recall petition against him. Chief Judge Mary Schroeder of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the case of Padilla v. Lever to be heard by a panel of 11 judges. In Padilla v. Lever, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit appeals court ruled last September that recall petitions circulated only in English violate the voting rights act.”

And The Los Angeles Times reports that “Court Will Rehear O.C. Petition Case.”

“Judges take a few swipes at Apple’s arguments; Appeal up against First Amendment rights in bid to find who leaked confidential information”: Today in The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz has an article that begins, “A state appeals court in San Jose on Thursday appeared openly hostile to Apple Computer’s attempts to pry information from bloggers that would reveal who may have leaked confidential information on a new company product. In a lively two-hour session, a panel of 6th District Court of Appeal justices repeatedly interrupted Apple lead attorney George Riley, questioning whether the company had valid reasons to sacrifice privacy and First Amendment rights in its quest to find out the source of the leak.” Earlier this week, Mintz previewed the oral argument in an article headlined “San Jose court to weigh blogger’s rights.”

In other coverage, The San Francisco Chronicle reports today that “Apple tries to keep its secrets; Firm argues no one has right to publish insider details.”

And Ina Fried and Declan McCullagh of c|net News.com report that “Apple argues for blogger records.”

“High Court Dismisses ‘Friends’ Harassment Lawsuit; An assistant on the show had sued because she found the speech of some writers offensive”: Maura Dolan has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Calif. high court rules offensive language is not sexual harassment.”

“Court Lets Schools Ban Inflammatory T-Shirts; A federal appeals panel rules that an anti-gay slogan sported by a San Diego-area high school student interfered with others’ right to learn”: Henry Weinstein has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Public schools can ban anti-minority messages.”

The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that “Poway student’s request rejected; Appeals court rules in anti-gay T-shirt case.”

And The North County Times contains an article headlined “Court: Schools can bar some speech.”

Available online from law.com: Mike McKee has articles headlined “Calif. Supreme Court Backs ‘Friends’ Writers in Harassment Case” and “Calif. Justices Let Stand Microsoft Settlement and Millions in Attorney Fees.”

“Religious Tests in the Mirror: The Constitutional Law and Constitutional Etiquette of Religion in Judicial Nominations.” Law Professor Paul Horwitz has posted this paper (abstract with link for download) at SSRN. And at “PrawfsBlawg,” he has this related post.

It’s like deja-vu, all over again: For those readers who arrived here at various times this afternoon and early evening in search of new content and found, instead, that the most recent post was from Tuesday, April 18, 2006, let me offer my apologies. The (rather humorous) cause of that issue has been identified, and I don’t expect the issue to recur. Of course, any readers who would prefer to read my posts from April 18th, you can either scroll down the page or simply click here.

“ADF attorneys plan to appeal ‘extremely poor’ ruling from 9th Circuit in Poway ‘T-shirt’ case”: The Alliance Defense Fund issued this press release today.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a related post titled “Sorry, Your Viewpoint Is Excluded from First Amendment Protection.” My earlier coverage is here.

“Bloggers-Meet-Readers on Thursday, April 27, 9 pm, in Cambridge, Massachusetts”: Eugene Volokh has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.” I’ll be among the many, many law bloggers in attendance, and Eugene’s post contains a list of all the law bloggers who currently plan to attend.

The papers that will be discussed at next Friday’s conference at Harvard are available via this link.

“Georgia OKs Bible Classes, Commandments”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Calif. high court rules offensive language is not sexual harassment”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle provides this news update.

“Court Rules Against Gay-Bashing T-Shirts”: Henry Weinstein of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.

“A new challenge to Roper”: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has this post about the pending petition for writ of certiorari filed by the State of Alabama in Alabama v. Adams.

The Supreme Court of Alabama‘s decision that gives rise to the cert. petition is the very same ruling that led recused Justice Tom Parker, in an op-ed published in The Birmingham News, to harshly criticize his non-recused colleagues for the decision they reached. Earlier press coverage of this matter can be accessed here and here, while related editorials from Alabama newspapers can be accessed here and here.

“Duff Chosen to Manage Judicial Branch; Managing partner at Baker Donelson named as the next director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.