“White House, Senators Near Pact on Interrogation Rules; President Would Have a Voice in How Detainees Are Questioned”: This front page article will appear Friday in The Washington Post.

The New York Times on Friday will report that “Republicans Reach Deal on Detainee Bill.”

And McClatchy Newspapers report that “Bush, senators reach agreement on detainee interrogation legislation.”

Available online from law.com: An article reports that “Rare Judicial Impeachment Hearing Ends With Little Action Taken.”

In other news, “N.Y. Judge Rebuffs McDonald’s Motion to Dismiss Deceptive Ad Claims.” You can access at this link the recent ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

And an article reports that “Attorneys Deny Allegations Client Plotted to Kill Judge; ‘Mess’ raises prospect of recusal motion.”

“Judge: BALCO reporters face prison if they lose appeals.” Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle provides this news update. The newspaper also provides an update headlined “Senator leads drive for federal media shield law.” Statements from the two reporters who are facing prison can be accessed here and here.

Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “GOP Senators, White House Agree on Detainee Deal” and “Compromise on Detainees May Ease McCain’s Path.”

And today’s broadcast of “Talk of the Nation” contained audio segments entitled “Detainees and the Right of Habeas Corpus” (featuring former D.C. Circuit Judge Patricia M. Wald) and “The Torture Debate on the Hill.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Scalia to Present Alito Award at NIAF Awards Dinner”: Metropolitan News-Enterprise provides this report.

The publication today also contains articles headlined “Public Libraries May Ban Religious Worship in Meeting Rooms“; “City Council Rejects Proposed Skid Row Settlement With ACLU“; and “S.C. to Decide if Actress’ Manager May Sue for Commissions.”

“Calif. judge denies wrongdoing as panel considers impeachment”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“For detainees: less access to US courts? The White House bill in Congress would strip courts of jurisdiction.” Warren Richey will have this article Friday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Judicial Impeachment Hearing Ends With Little Action Taken”: law.com’s T.R. Goldman provides a news update that begins, “A House Judiciary subcommittee today held a rare impeachment hearing for a California federal judge but reached no conclusions and appeared eager to let a special committee of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit finish its investigation before deciding whether to take up the matter in Congress again.”

Video available online from C-SPAN: You can view the video of today’s House Judiciary Committee subcommittee hearing on a resolution to impeach U.S. District Judge Manuel L. Real by clicking here (RealPlayer required).

And, by clicking here, you can view the video of today’s Senate Judiciary Committee executive business meeting, at which one federal appellate court nominee was favorably reported to the floor of the U.S. Senate.

“Court: Senator Can’t Be Military Judge.” The Associated Press provides this report. My earlier coverage is at this link.

Ninth Circuit issues proposed local rules to address forthcoming federal rule of appellate procedure allowing citation to “unpublished” and non-precedential federal court rulings issued on or after January 1, 2007: You can access the Ninth Circuit’s proposed rule revisions at this link.

The Sixth Circuit’s home page also contains links to that court’s proposed new local rule revisions, but as of this moment the links to the proposed new rules are not links that the general public (i.e., anyone outside of the Sixth Circuit’s own computer system) can use to access the documents. [Update: I am reliably advised that the issue of the non-working links from the Sixth Circuit’s home page will be corrected promptly.]

“Bush, GOP Rebels Said to Be Near Accord”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Bush administration and rebellious GOP senators neared agreement Thursday on legislation setting terms for the interrogation and trial of suspects in the war on terror, congressional officials said.”

“Court delays disclosing pay of Paterno, Penn State aides; It could take 16 months for Pa.’s top court to hear the university’s appeal”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an article that begins, “Joe Paterno’s secret salary is going to stay secret at least a little while longer. The state Supreme Court yesterday agreed to hear Penn State’s appeal of an earlier court ruling that would have made public the salaries of the longtime football coach as well as several university administrators.”

The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania reports today that “Panel to hear appeal on Penn State salaries.”

And The Daily Collegian of Penn State University reports that “Court to review appeal; A court hearing will decide whether or not the salaries of Joe Paterno and three administrators should be public record.”

Tuesday’s order of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania granting review in the case can be accessed here.

You fooled me, Second Circuit web site: For a few moments earlier this afternoon, this page at the Second Circuit’s web site tricked me into treating as new today’s reissuance (due to the correction of errata) of a decision originally issued on August 1, 2006, which I reported on that day in a post you can access here.

“U.S. attorney Mike Heavican new Chief Justice”: This article appears today in The Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star.

And today’s issue of The Omaha World-Herald contains articles headlined “Heavican called sterling lawyer” and “New U.S. attorney needed after Heavican’s departure.”

“Bush, McCain reach agreement on tribunal laws; Deal comes as House, Senate wrangle over how to treat enemy combatants”: NBC News provides this report.

“Meaning of ‘plainly offensive’ speech anything but clear”: David L. Hudson Jr. has this essay online at the First Amendment Center.

“Parties split over proposed split of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals”: The Seattle Times today contains an article that begins, “A long-simmering debate over how justice is meted out in the Western U.S. rose to a boil Wednesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee debated proposals to split the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.”

In today’s edition of The Daily Journal of California, Lawrence Hurley reports that “Former Governor Wilson Testifies Against Splitting 9th Circuit.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Senators, judges face off over breaking up 9th circuit.”

“Feds Ask Court to Drop Wiretapping Case”: Hope Yen of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Bush administration asked an appeals court Thursday to step in immediately and dismiss a lawsuit over the government’s warrantless eavesdropping program, calling a lower judge’s ruling dangerous and wrong.”

The case in question is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. My earlier coverage of the federal district court’s ruling appears at this link.

“Alexander prevails in bitter court race”: The Seattle Times today contains an article that begins, “Fresh from battle, interest groups on both sides of a bitter struggle for control of the state Supreme Court are arming themselves for another expensive showdown.”

On Tuesday’s season premiere of “Boston Legal,” Eugene Volokh wasn’t a janitor; rather, he was a security guard: So says the man himself, in a post you can access here. My earlier post on the subject appears at this link.

“The Right to Present a Twinkie Defense”: Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. Dreeben has this interesting article in the Summer 2006 issue of The Green Bag. Dreeben argued the case of United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez last Term in the U.S. Supreme Court. That 5-4 decision was noteworthy, among other reasons, because Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. wrote the dissenting opinion.

Thanks to the involvement of U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the affirmance of Charles Lane’s conviction for wrongful use of cocaine has been vacated: Of course, the Charles Lane is question isn’t the erstwhile movie star who covers the U.S. Supreme Court for The Washington Post. Rather, this particular Charles Lane serves as Airman First Class in the U.S. Air Force.

In any event, as Law Professor Eugene Volokh reports here, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces held yesterday, in U.S. v. Lane, that appointing Senator Lindsey Graham — a colonel in the reserves — as a temporary military appellate judge violated the Incompatibility Clause of the Constitution.” You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces at this link.

Update: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston reports on the ruling in a post titled “Ruling: senator cannot be military judge, too.”

Appearing soon at a law school campus near me: I just learned that an interesting appellate matter that I’m handling before the Superior Court of Pennsylvania has been set for oral argument on October 17, 2006 at the Duane Morris LLP Moot Courtroom of the Temple University Beasley School of Law. I appear to have drawn quite a good panel for the case, although my case is listed 18th(!), meaning that anyone at Temple Law wishing to see me in action may have to wait till the afternoon of October 17th. If there’s sufficient interest, I’d be more than pleased to grab a quick lunch with any Temple Law-based fans of “How Appealing,” although when I become available for lunch will depend on when the court decides to take its lunch break.

One week earlier, on the afternoon of October 10, 2006, I’m scheduled to be guest speaker at Christopher J. Schmidt’s appellate advocacy class at Widener University School of Law in Harrisburg. Chris is currently clerking for a Justice on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

I think that it’s cool when appellate courts hold oral arguments on-the-road, such as at law schools, although I’m afraid that the typical reaction of someone subjected to a day’s worth of oral arguments before the Pa. Superior Court is to wonder “Why did I ever decide to become a lawyer?” See my December 2003 Legal Intelligencer column headlined “Too Much Of A Good Thing — Oral Argument In The Superior Court of Pennsylvania.”

“You have no right to vote: The Constitution doesn’t guarantee it, the Republicans know it, and real democratic values in our country are under assault.” Law Professor Garrett Epps has this essay today at Salon.com.

Twenty-five years ago today: As noted here, “In 1981, the Senate unanimously confirmed the nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor to become the first female justice on the Supreme Court.”

“Cooler Heads: The difference between the president’s lawyers and the military’s.” Law Professor Richard Schragger has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Impeachment of Judge Manuel Real”: C-SPAN3 is providing live coverage of today’s hearing before the House Judiciary Committee. You can access the live coverage online using RealPlayer or Windows Media Player.

The House Judiciary Committee provides additional background on the matter at this link. The draft impeachment resolution can be accessed here.

“In the Pipeline: An overview of possible Supreme Court cases in the coming term.” Walter M. Weber has this essay today at National Review Online.

“Clash of visions over CIA interrogations; Can the broad terms of the Geneva Conventions be more clearly defined without weakening them?” Warren Richey has this article today in The Christian Science Monitor.

And The Associated Press reports that “Democrats Sit Out Detainee Debate.”

Eugene Volokh on ABC’s “Boston Legal“: A post Tuesday night at the blog “Plum Blossoms” asks, “Did anyone notice that ‘Eugene Volokh’ was the name of some unseen janitor in tonight’s season premiere of Boston Legal?”

And a long-time reader emails, “Apparently there has not been a blip in the blogosphere about the fact that a character named ‘Eugene Volokh’ was mentioned in the course of questioning a witness in Tuesday night’s episode of Boston Legal. The reference was not, though, to Eugene himself – that is, he was mentioned as something else, not a law professor.”

I have the season premiere on videotape but haven’t watched it yet.

“Anti-injection man executed in US; US death row inmate Clarence Hill has been executed by lethal injection at a Florida state prison, hours after the Supreme Court rejected a final appeal”: BBC News provides this report.

The New York Times reports today that “Court Refuses Second Delay; Inmate Dies.”

The Pensacola News Journal reports today that “Hill executed; Death brings little relief to victim’s family.”

The Orlando Sentinel reports that “Execution sends message to other death-row inmates.”

And The Tallahassee Democrat reports that “Hill executed for killing officer.”

Meanwhile, in somewhat related news, The Baltimore Sun today contains an article headlined “Uncertainty on execution team; 2 members testify in Evans suit they’re unsure of some procedures.”

“House Panel Supports Tribunal Plan, 20 to 19; Bush Proposal Faces Tough Odds in Senate”: The Washington Post contains this article today, along with a Washington Sketch column by Dana Milbank entitled “Bush’s Bill Suffers a Torturous Day in Committee.”

The Los Angeles Times reports today that “2 Drafted for Vote on Terror Bill; After an early defeat, a House panel finds two missing members to help pass Bush’s military tribunals bill; Wiretaps measure also moves on.”

And The Hill reports that “House judiciary panel pulls off victory on military tribunal bill.”

“Ex-Nazi guard says she ‘did nothing wrong’ — and her silence ‘was my business'”: This article appears today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Judge Delays Trial Date for Milberg Weiss Case”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “The possibility of more indictments involving class-action law giant Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman caused the Los Angeles judge in the case Wednesday to postpone setting a trial date for the five defendants already charged.”