“Research Center to Be Named for Rehnquist”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Area judge ranked 4th in free trips; Group lists Jones among the circuit jurists going on the most junkets paid by conservatives”: Today in The Houston Chronicle, Harvey Rice has an article that begins, “Chief Judge Edith Jones of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ranks fourth on a list of judges who accept free trips sponsored by conservative interest groups and corporations, according to a report by an environmental law group.”

In news from Connecticut: Today in The Hartford Courant, Lynne Tuohy reports that “Rell To Form Panel On Court Access.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Rell defends federal judge recommendation, predicts confirmation.”

Available online from National Public Radio: Today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained a segment entitled “Moussaoui Asks for New Trial.”

And yesterday evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained a segment entitled “Indian Tribe May Open Abortion Clinic on Its Land.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“The Kavanaugh hearing”: This editorial appears today in The Washington Times.

“Enron verdict hinges on Lay, Skilling testimony, experts say”: Mary Flood has this article today in The Houston Chronicle. And the newspaper also contains an article headlined “Lay, Skilling say they ‘feel good’; Final testimonies give 2 contrasting views of company’s former chairman.”

The Wall Street Journal reports today that “Enron Trial to Start Its Final Chapter; Defense and Prosecution Rest Without Calling New Experts; Closing to Start Next Week” (free access).

The New York Times contains an article headlined “What Remains Unanswered at Enron Trial.”

And The Washington Post reports that “After Six Weeks, Defense Rests In Enron Trial; Verdict Could Turn on Defendants’ Words.”

“Court hears killer’s appeal; Lawyers seek access to Balto. County files to explore racial bias”: The Baltimore Sun contains this article today.

And The Washington Post reports today that “Injection Illegal, Attorneys Argue; Lawyers Also Say Bias Taints Decision to Seek Death Penalty.”

“Sniper prosecution continues; Muhammad cross-examines witnesses to fatal shooting at Mobil station”: This article appears today in The Baltimore Sun.

And in The Washington Post, columnist Marc Fisher has an op-ed entitled “Too Much Pain, Not Much Point in Sniper Trial.”

“Moussaoui’s Move to Recant Guilty Plea Is Denied”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.

The Washington Post reports today that “Moussaoui Fails in Bid to Withdraw 9/11 Guilty Plea.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Judge Denies Bid by Moussaoui to Withdraw Guilty Plea; The convicted Al Qaeda operative says he was surprised to have gotten a fair trial and now contends he was not involved in the 9/11 plot.”

And The Washington Times reports that “Moussaoui asks judge to withdraw guilty plea.”

“Senate Rejects Award Limits in Malpractice”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Senate Defeats Effort to Limit Medical Malpractice Awards; The measures, which had been a priority for Bush, would have limited damages for pain and suffering to $250,000 in most cases.”

“U.S. Subpoenas Newspaper for Sources in Steroid Case”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

“Bar Panel Downgrades Bush Nominee for Judiciary”: Neil A. Lewis has this article today in The New York Times.

The Washington Post reports today that “Senators to Renew Debate on Court Nominee; Democrats Prepare Familiar Argument.” And a related editorial is entitled “A Tale of Two Judges: New skirmishes in the judicial nomination wars are brewing. But their merits aren’t the same.” The editorial asserts that “The Senate should confirm Mr. Kavanaugh but not Judge Boyle.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Starr Aide’s Nomination Divisive.”

And The Washington Times reports that “GOP rips lowering of nominee’s ABA rating.”

“Senators further scrutinize court nominee”: In Tuesday’s edition of USA Today, Joan Biskupic will have an article that begins, “The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a rare second hearing for judicial nominee Brett Kavanaugh today, spurred by Democrats who have focused on the power of the court he would join and his background.”

“Rove prepares 20 judges”: Tuesday’s edition of The Hill will contain an article that begins, “Presidential adviser Karl Rove and White House counsel Harriet Miers yesterday told conservative activists and Senate staff that the administration would soon send the names of more than 20 judicial nominees to Capitol Hill for confirmation.”

“The Best Little Courthouse in Texas; Upset by patent rulings, tech companies push Congress for venue reform”: law.com provides this report.

“ABA Downgrades White House Aide’s Rating”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The American Bar Association downgraded its rating of President Bush’s appellate court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after new interviews raised concerns about his courtroom experience and open-mindedness, the chairman of the peer-review panel said Monday.”

Relatedly, the White House today issued news releases entitled “Setting the Record Straight: The ABA Finds Brett Kavanaugh Is ‘Indeed Qualified to Serve on the Federal Bench’” and “Fact Sheet: Brett M. Kavanaugh: Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.”

“Heading into Second Hearing, Burden Is on Kavanaugh”: People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas issued this statement today.

Tomorrow’s hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m.

“Moussaoui seeks new trial”: Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Moussaoui Asks to Withdraw Guilty Plea.”

Zacarias Moussaoui’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea can be accessed here.

One risk in Moussaoui’s strategy is that, for reasons I have previously explained here, he could potentially be subjected to the death penalty at any new proceeding.

Update: The federal district court’s order issued today denying Moussaoui’s motion to withdraw the guilty plea can be accessed here.

Available online from SSRN: Patrick J. Borchers has an article entitled “The Essential Irrelevance of the Full Faith and Credit Clause to the Same-Sex Marriage Debate” (via “Legal Theory Blog”).

And Davida H. Isaacs has an article entitled “The Highest Form of Flattery? Application of the Fair Use Defense against Copyright Claims for Unauthorized Appropriation of Litigation Documents.”

“Anonymous Lawyer”: If you loved the blog, now you can love the book — “Anonymous Lawyer: A Novel” — too, thanks to Amazon.com’s pre-order feature.

I’m reliably advised that I have the ability to designate two “How Appealing” readers to receive advance reading copies of the book “Anonymous Lawyer: A Novel” hot off the presses. If any readers have any clever thoughts concerning what sort of contest I should hold, please feel free to email me. Chances are quite good that I will designate one book for the person who proposes the most clever contest, and the other book for the contest’s winner. All decisions of the contest’s judge (me in both instances) are final. Although the book itself won’t appear on shelves until late July, the advance reading copies are ready to ship now, so contest ideas are officially being solicited at this time.

“Complaint Against Judge Has Broader Ramifications; Judicial panel says it lacks power to sanction L.A. jurist; Bill would create inspector general”: As I first noted yesterday in a post you can access here, Henry Weinstein had this very interesting article yesterday in The Los Angeles Times.

Late last month, the U.S. Courts’ Judicial Conference Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct and Disability Orders issued the ruling that was the central focus yesterday’s Los Angeles Times article. I have obtained a copy of that ruling by a divided committee — “Judges Dolores K. Sloviter, Barefoot Sanders, and Pasco M. Bowman, II, have concurred in the opinion of the Committee. Judge Ralph K. Winter, Jr., issued a dissenting statement, also attached, in which Judge Carolyn R. Dimmick joins” — and have posted the complete ruling online at this link.

I hope that soon I will be able to announce which appellate judge will be the 21st interviewee in this blog’s “20 questions for the appellate judge” feature: On Saturday, in my post commemorating this blog’s four-year anniversary, I wrote that to mark the occasion I would be resuming this blog’s quite popular “20 questions for the appellate judge” interview series.

As was the case during the feature’s initial appearance, my intention is to have one “20 questions” interview appear each month. During the feature’s original incarnation, 20 different appellate judges were interviewed over 20 consecutive months. My hope is that the first installment of this interview feature’s new incarnation will appear in June 2006.

As before, participants in the feature will be obtained on a volunteer basis. At this time, I am only seeking a volunteer to participate in the “20 questions for the appellate judge” feature in June 2006. Next month, I will seek a volunteer to participate in July 2006, and so on. The very first federal or state appellate judge to volunteer to be the “20 questions for the appellate judge” interviewee for June 2006 will be the subject of my June 2006 interview. To volunteer, simply send me an email at [email protected]. Once a volunteer comes forward, I will put up a post announcing who the interviewee for June 2006 will be and explaining that no other interview volunteers are being sought at this time.

The interview is conducted entirely in writing via email. I envision transmitting the 20 questions to the interviewee on June 1, 2006, and I would request that the answers be returned to me on or before Monday, June 19, 2006. The twenty previous installments of the “20 questions for the appellate judge” feature are archived at this link, and all future installments will be archived there too after they debut as a post here at “How Appealing.” Thanks again to all of the readers and judges who have persuaded me to resume this feature.

“Little-Known Weird Legal Fact Leads to Glitch in Court of Appeals Opinion”: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh today has this interesting post about a recent opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that for quite understandable reasons misattributed to the U.S. Supreme Court a quotation from an early ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

“If Roe v. Wade is overturned, is Del. ready?” Harry F. Themal has this op-ed today in The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware.

“Ellen Maria Reasonover was convicted in 1983 of killing James Buckley. Reasonover served over 16 years in prison, and was released in 1999 after her petition for writ of habeas corpus was granted.” So begins an opinion that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued today affirming a federal district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on Reasonover’s federal civil rights and state law claims arising from her wrongful conviction and imprisonment.

Earlier coverage of this matter is available online from The American Lawyer, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and Salon.com.

“Facelift Scheduled for Federal Courthouse”: This article appears today in The New York Sun.

“My lawyer got me $1M, but I can’t talk about it; Ad, legal world fight over testimonials”: Yesterday’s issue of The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contained this article.

“Kavanaugh to reappear before Senate Judiciary Committee”: This article appears today in The D.C. Examiner, along with an article headlined “Federal court nominee is Washington native.”

“Update on Uighurs”: Lyle Denniston has this post online at “SCOTUSblog.”

“How can you choose who dies? The application of the ultimate punishment is inexact at best; Some say that is reason to abolish it.” This article appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.

And today’s edition of The Hartford Courant contains an article headlined “Capital Clumsiness: Ohio Case Is Latest In Line Of Bungled Executions.”

“Blawg Review #56: Sex, Virtual Weddings, and Baseball.” Available here, at “PointofLaw.com.”

In today’s edition of The National Law Journal: Marcia Coyle reports that “Tobacco pact may light up high court; AGs seek to save massive settlement.”

And the Voir Dire column contains an item reporting that, at the recent judicial conference of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Justice David H. Souter “cheerfully broke the news that Alito had issued his first Supreme Court opinion–and that the staunch conservative had reversed a criminal conviction in North Carolina. ‘A year from now will I read headlines, “No more Alitos?”‘ Souter wondered aloud.”

“Is the Stock Ownership Recusal Requirement Too Unforgiving?” The brand new installment of my weekly “On Appeal” column for law.com can be accessed at this link.

“Even if he wins, Lay is not off hook; Bank fraud, false statement charges looming”: Mary Flood has this article today in The Houston Chronicle.

“Bush Says He’d Like to Close Guantanamo”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “President Bush says he would like to close the detention center in Guantanamo in Cuba, but is waiting for a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on whether inmates can face military tribunals.” The complete transcript of President Bush’s interview with a correspondent from ARD German Television can be accessed here.