“Who says judges are apolitical? Appointing judges is really a job for politicians.” Law Professor James Allan had this op-ed in Friday’s edition of The Australian.

Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “GOP Senators Try for Compromise on Tribunals.”

Today’s broadcast of “Weekend Edition Sunday” contained an audio segment entitled “Terrorism Tribunals and the Fall Campaign.”

And yesterday’s broadcast of “Weekend Edition Saturday” contained audio segments entitled “Debate over Terrorism Tribunals Splits GOP” and “Court Case Prompts Hollywood Plagiarism Debate.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Why GOP trio is bucking the White House”: Monday’s edition of The Christian Science Monitor will contain an article that begins, “For the Bush White House, this week’s showdown with the Senate over US treatment of detainees sets up a rematch with a triumvirate of GOP senators who have been the president’s strongest supporters in the war in Iraq – and his most effective critics.”

“Reformers given new life”: The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania today contains an article that begins, “As voter outrage started to wane, reform advocates and political organizers believe the state Supreme Court decision reinstating judges’ pay raises will re-ignite the voter anger that has already led to the defeat of 16 incumbents and the decision by scores more not to seek re-election.” And in related news, “Ruling on raises stalks lawmakers; For them, timing couldn’t be worse.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an editorial entitled “The Pay Raise Ruling: Charity begins at home.” The editorial begins, “It took some tortured logic to preserve pay raises for more than 1,000 judges in Pennsylvania, but with that kind of motivation, the state Supreme Court was equal to the task. The court’s ruling Thursday on cases stemming from the notorious pay raise was awful on several counts.”

The Pottstown Mercury contains an editorial entitled “Judges’ decision keeps pay raise for themselves.”

In The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, columnist Eric Heyl has an op-ed entitled “Should I get a raise? I vote yes.”

In The Reading Eagle, columnist John D. Forester Jr. has an op-ed entitled “State justices make sure they get theirs.”

The Sunday Review of Towanda, Pennsylvania contains an editorial entitled “Register outrage over judicial raises in upcoming election.”

And The Tribune-Democrat of Johnstown contains an editorial entitled “Back on front burner; Just in time for elections stretch run.”

“Tribunal Dispute Could Ruin GOP Strategy; Bush-McCain Standoff Over Terrorism Trials Overshadows Electoral Battle”: The Washington Post contains this article today, along with an editorial entitled “A License to Abuse: Mr. Bush says he has ‘one question’ for Congress; The right answer to it is ‘no.’”

The Los Angeles Times today contains a lengthy article headlined “Volatile Mix Gets 14 Stirs; At Guantanamo Bay, the arrival of suspected terrorist leaders puts new pressure on the guards and could rouse restive inmates.” In addition, a related editorial is entitled “No Rubber Stamp for Bush: The president deserves even more resistance to his method of waging war on terror.”

And The Chicago Tribune contains an editorial entitled “Listen to McCain and Powell.”

“A Bad Amendment: Even if you oppose gay marriage, Virginia’s ban would go too far.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.

“Who gets to make decision on end of life? ‘Futile-care law’ in Texas under fire.” The Chicago Tribune contains this article today.

“Timely Transcripts at Last: The Supreme Court becomes a bit less bashful.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.

“Major Problems At Polls Feared; Some Officials Say Voting Law Changes And New Technology Will Cause Trouble”: The Washington Post today contains a front page article that begins, “An overhaul in how states and localities record votes and administer elections since the Florida recount battle six years ago has created conditions that could trigger a repeat — this time on a national scale — of last week’s Election Day debacle in the Maryland suburbs, election experts said.”

And a related article is headlined “Md. Election Problems Fuel Push for Paper Record; After Primary Day Fiasco, Some Area Officials and Activists Say Electronic Voting Systems Need Backup.”

“The Battle for Guantanamo”: This lengthy article appears today in The New York Times Magazine.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “U.S. War Prisons Legal Vacuum for 14,000” and “Tenn. Prisoner Set for Electrocution.”

Opinion pieces published in today’s edition of The New York Times: An editorial entitled “Bush Untethered” begins, “Watching the president on Friday in the Rose Garden as he threatened to quit interrogating terrorists if Congress did not approve his detainee bill, we were struck by how often he acts as though there were not two sides to a debate.”

Law Professor John Yoo has an op-ed entitled “How the Presidency Regained Its Balance.”

And former detainee Abu Bakker Qassim has an op-ed entitled “The View From Guantanamo.”

“2 Scandals Hang Over Top Tech Lawyer; The head of a firm tied to Silicon Valley’s stock options probe is also HP’s outside counsel”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “He’s hardly a household name, but Larry Sonsini is among the handful of people who can take credit for creating the technology powerhouse that is Silicon Valley.”

“Bizarre divorce saga: A man, a woman and missing millions.” The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Slight, scholarly and enigmatic, H. Beatty Chadwick is doing this day what he has done for the past 4,093: He is sitting in a county jail outside Philadelphia.”

“Bagel-shop owner wins appeal to use outdoor advertisements”: The Seattle Times today contains an article that begins, “Blazing Bagels owner Dennis Ballen won an appeal to keep his outdoor advertising signs Friday when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an earlier district-court ruling that the city of Redmond’s ban on portable signs is unconstitutional.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Graceless: Did Nancy Grace kill Melinda Duckett?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

In news from Connecticut: Today in The Hartford Courant, Lynne Tuohy has an article headlined “Sullivan Hearings Delayed” that begins, “The Judicial Review Council Friday canceled next week’s hearings into alleged misconduct by former Chief Justice William J. Sullivan at the request of his lawyers, who cited health problems plaguing the 67-year-old judge.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Panel Seeks More Open Courts.”

“Notables Urge India to End 145-Year Ban on Gay Sex”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “CIA’s Suspect Interrogations Scrutinized” and “Bush Digs in Heels Over Detainee Bill.”

“How 3 G.O.P. Veterans Stalled Bush Detainee Bill”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

“Justice visits campus to promote Constitution; Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito speaks at the School of Law as part of Constitution Week celebration”: The Pepperdine University Graphic provides this report.

“Ruling gives judges $7.5 million in back pay”: This article appears today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

And The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review today contains an article headlined “Back pay for 1,100 Pa. judges could cost taxpayers more than $4.5M” and an editorial entitled “Judges’ pay raise: Objection!”

“Nevada bar opposes Ensign-backed plan to break up 9th circuit appeals court”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“The Question of Liability Stirs Concern at the C.I.A.” The New York Times contains this article today.

The Washington Post today contains a news analysis headlined “Behind the Debate, Controversial CIA Techniques; Interrogation Options Seen as Vital.”

The Los Angeles Times contains articles headlined “Bush Fires Back at Republican Rebels; After four GOP senators oppose his detainee proposal, he warns that the debate’s outcome will define whether ‘we can protect ourselves’” and “Dispute Centers on Reading of Geneva Convention.”

The Chicago Tribune contains articles headlined “Bush bill could hurt war crimes probes; 17 investigations into detainee abuse at issue” and “Bush presses case for terror interrogations; Detainee questioning could end, he warns.”

The Boston Globe reports that “Bush raps McCain’s detainee proposals; Says measures would cripple war on terror.”

And The Washington Times contains an article headlined “Bush: Interrogation vital.”

“Bush Says G.O.P. Rebels Are Putting Nation at Risk”: This article will appear Saturday in The New York Times, along with an article headlined “Military Lawyers Caught in Middle on Tribunals.”

The Washington Post on Saturday will contain a front page article headlined “GOP Infighting on Detainees Intensifies; Bush Threatens to Halt CIA Program if Congress Passes Rival Proposal.”

The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Bush, Republican Senators Differ on Interrogation.”

And McClatchy Newspapers report that “Position on detainee trials comes at political risk for GOP senators” and “Bush threatens to shut CIA interrogation program.”

Available online from law.com: Marcia Coyle reports that “New Supreme Court Term Promises Early Drama.”

Shannon P. Duffy reports that “Former Reed Smith Partner Selected for 3rd Circuit.”

And the brand new installment of my “On Appeal” column is headlined “When Can an Inmate ‘Volunteer’ for Death? 9th Circuit rejects a competent inmate’s decision to abandon legal challenge to his capital sentence.”

Clarence Hill is one step closer to execution: In June, Hill won a unanimous victory before the U.S. Supreme Court when the Court ruled that Hill could rely on the federal civil rights statute to bring a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a three-drug sequence the State of Florida likely would use to execute him by lethal injection. Today, however, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled, in a per curiam opinion you can access here, that Hill was not entitled to a stay of execution to pursue the trial court’s dismissal of his federal civil rights action.

In a post at his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Doug Berman writes, “it does not appear that Hill has even received an adjudication of his claim on the merits in the district court, and the Eleventh Circuit decision today never considers the substance of Hill’s underlying Eighth Amendment claim.”

An interesting appellate jurisdiction deadline-for-appeal ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: The judgment on a separate document rule and the rule requiring a federal district court in certain instances to approve the form of the judgment are both involved in this ruling issued today. I’m going to have to look at this decision closely to see whether I agree with the court’s rationale in holding that the rule providing that the absence of a separate document no longer precludes an appealable order from arising 150 days later also excuses a federal district court’s obligation in certain instances to approve the form of the judgment.

“Toobin: Bush ‘playing chicken’ with senators.” CNN.com has posted online this transcript.

“Officials Say SD Tourism Boycott Failed”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A threatened tourism boycott of South Dakota over new state law that bans nearly all abortions has had little effect on travel, officials said.”

“Roberts’ First Year: Kenneth Starr takes part in a discussion on the impact of Chief Justice John Roberts first year on the Supreme Court.” You can view, online and on demand, last Saturday’s broadcast of C-SPAN‘s “America & the Courts” program by clicking here (RealPlayer required). Toward the end of the broadcast, one journalist discusses the impact of blogs on the U.S Supreme Court confirmation process.

“The Supreme Court: Past and Prologue; A Look at the October 2005 and October 2006 Terms.” Much of the Cato Institute’s day-long seminar — held yesterday in Washington, DC — is available for viewing or listening via this link.

Sixth Circuit Chief Judge Danny J. Boggs delivered the concluding address, and you can launch the video by clicking here (RealPlayer required).

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Bush Defends Changes to Detainee Rules“; “Senate GOP Pushes Back on Detainee Rules“; “A Profile of the ‘Guardian of Guantanamo’“; and “Democrats Seek Middle Ground on Abortion” (RealPlayer required).

“This is an interlocutory appeal by criminal defendants challenging a requirement that pretrial detainees making their first appearance before a magistrate judge wear leg shackles.” So began an opinion that the majority on divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on November 15, 2005. The majority went on to hold that the requirement could not be upheld on the present record, which lacked “a reasoned determination that it is justified on the basis of past experiences or present circumstances in the Central District.” My earlier post reporting on that decision can be accessed here.

Today, the very same three-judge panel issued an order vacating its earlier decision and substituting a new, unanimous ruling that upholds the shackling policy based on the current record.

“US federal judge declares boating illegal in all US navigable waters”: International Boat Industry Magazine provides this report. Whether the report’s headline provides a fair summary of last month’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Lousiana I’ll leave for others to decide.