On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Detainees’ Military Lawyer Forced Out of Service” (featuring Nina Totenberg) and “Inmates Smuggle In Cell Phones with Ease.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Fla. Court Upholds Topless Protest”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A woman, who was arrested when she exposed her breasts to protest laws that bar women from publicly going bare breasted, can demonstrate topless as part of a legitimate political protest, an appeals court has ruled.”

Nude prosecutors take note — the proposed amendment to Michigan’s constitution to ban affirmative action will not affect pubic employment: The Grand Haven (Mich.) Tribune reported on Tuesday that “Error on November ballot costs county $40,000” (via “Obscure Store“).

The actual text of ballot proposal 06-02 (sans typo) can be accessed here.

Update: “How Appealing” has previously gone public with two pubic typos contained in court opinions: the first sentence of this Second Circuit opinion (page 3 of the PDF file), originally covered here; and the very first line at the top of page three of this Third Circuit opinion, originally covered here.

“Prosecutor’s law license in peril; Nude forays said related to mental illness and medicine”: This article appears today in The Cincinnati Enquirer.

“Justice Breyer at the New Yorker Festival: Some Highlights.” The blog “Above the Law” provides this post.

“George Soros’s Two Left Hands: The partisan squeeze on judicial seminars.” Edward Whelan has this essay today at National Review Online.

“2 high court justices on ballot defy labels”: Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, had this article last Saturday in that newspaper.

Recently issued news releases from the Public Information Office of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: A news release issued yesterday bears the heading “Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to Sit with Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.” My earlier coverage appears at this link.

And a news release issued today bears the heading “San Diego Event Honors Renowned Judge.”

In today’s mail (if UPS qualifies as mail): The DVD set of volume two of “Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law.” And, once again, I have the most wonderful PG of the blog “de novo” to thank!

“John Yoo’s War”: That was the title of the first hour of today’s broadcast of the public radio program “On Point.” You can launch the audio online using either RealPlayer or Windows Media Player software.

The program featured an interview with “the legal architect of the war on terror” — Law Professor John Yoo.

“Justice Bedsworth Tells Lawyers to Enjoy Their Success”: This article appeared Tuesday in the Metropolitan News-Enterprise.

“State’s Scheme for Sentencing Perplexes Court; Justices Try to See Regime in Context of Federal Guides”: Brent Kendall has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.

“In summary, we hold that the First and Fourteenth Amendments do not prohibit the Ohio General Assembly from requiring independent candidates to claim on the day before the primary that they are not affiliated with any political party.” A unanimous three-judge Sixth Circuit panel today issued an opinion providing a more detailed explanation for that panel’s earlier decision rejecting a former Republican congressional candidate’s challenge to Ohio’s refusal to allow him to now appear on the ballot as an independent candidate.

It’s “like deja vu all over again” times two: Today a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a published opinion affirming the dissolution of an injunction against the latest version of a Nashville ordinance governing sexually oriented businesses. The Sixth Circuit had previously resolved the current appeal, pursued by plaintiff Deja Vu of Nashville, Inc., by means of an unpublished opinion filed June 22, 2006. And perhaps that explains why today’s published opinion is designated as an “Amended Opinion.”

“Law professor publishes first mystery novel”: The Yale Daily News today contains an article that begins, “While the rights to privacy and free speech are certainly titillating in their own right, sometimes a little murder, sex and Freudian psychoanalysis can come as a welcome break from the study of constitutional law. Or so it seemed for Jed Rubenfeld, a Yale law professor whose first novel, ‘The Interpretation of Murder,’ was released last month by Holt & Co.”

“Police need warrant to search dorm room, appeals court rules”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “Police have no authority to search a college dormitory without a warrant, even if they’re invited in by a campus security officer who is legally entitled to be there, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Court of Appeal for the Sixth Appellate District at this link.

“3 senators slam Bush on FEMA provision; President says he can bypass law”: Charlie Savage has this article today in The Boston Globe.

In today’s issue of The Argus Leader of Sioux Falls, South Dakota: The newspaper contains articles headlined “Candidates debate abortion ban; Governor: Lives could be saved; Billion: proposed law too rigid” and “High court justices’ fate up to voters; But issue attracts little attention.”

In addition, competing op-eds debate the so-called “J.A.I.L. for Judges Amendment.”

“High Court Considers System for Sentencing; How the Supreme Court rules may give inmates in California a chance for shorter prison terms”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Inmate’s Bid for Freedom Can Proceed, Judge Rules; Jurist says appeal by man convicted of killing his mother may proceed despite missed deadline”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a San Fernando Valley man who claims he was falsely convicted of killing his mother has demonstrated he is probably innocent and should be allowed to seek freedom despite having missed a deadline to appeal.”

“Outsiders Bankroll Prop. 90 Campaign; Out-of-state groups push for measure that would bar government from seizing businesses and homes for private uses”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

The newspaper today also contains an editorial entitled “No on Proposition 90: Instead of merely protecting property from eminent domain, initiative would hobble regulation such as zoning.”

“Enron’s Skilling Asks to Remain Free on Bail During His Appeal”: The Washington Post contains this article today.

At the “Houston’s Clear Thinkers” blog, Tom Kirkendall has a post titled “Previewing the Skilling appeal” that provides access to Skilling’s motion for bail pending appeal.

“Doctor Will Remain In Prison Until Retrial; Physician, Whose Drug Conviction Was Overturned, Deemed a Flight Risk”: This article appears today in The Washington Post. My earlier coverage is here.

“Buttons’ Influence on Jury at Issue for Justices”: Charles Lane has this article today in The Washington Post.

Today in The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse reports that “Justices Ponder Relationship of Federal and State Courts.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Justices Debate Photo Buttons Worn by Trial Spectators.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Court weighs effect of victim’s image on trial.”

And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Justices disagree on buttons at S.J. trial.”

“States Are Growing More Lenient in Allowing Felons to Vote”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

“‘Bully’ boggles circuit judge; A judge will get to preview the controversial video game Bully and make recommendations about its ‘Teen’ rating prior to its Tuesday release”: The Miami Herald today contains an article that begins, “Is a video game that glorifies bullying suitable for Florida teenagers? A circuit court judge in Miami-Dade County hopes to figure that out this afternoon.”

And The Washington Post reports today that “Florida Judge Wants To See ‘Bully’ in Court.”

“Judges Can Solicit Election Funds, Court Rules”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

The Louisville Courier-Journal reports today that “Candidates for judge can reveal party; U.S. court strikes down state rule.”

And The Lexington Herald-Leader yesterday published an article headlined “Judge: Judicial candidates can identify their political parties.”

At his “Election Law” blog, Rick Hasen has a post that provides access to the ruling.

“High Court in Britain Loosens Strict Libel Law”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Times of London today contains an article headlined “Libel ruling heralds new era for British journalism; Lords agree to allow journalists new freedom to make public interest allegations without fear of libel.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “The public interest: The Lords upholds a vital principle of press freedom.” And Alistair Brett has an essay entitled “A judgment that is refreshing and long overdue.”

Yesterday, The Times of London published news updates headlined “Landmark ruling heralds US-style libel laws in Britain” and “Lawyers welcome landmark libel ruling.” And Guy Vassall-Adams had an essay entitled “A resounding victory for newspapers: The law lords have ensured that responsible journalism is given legal protection.”

Yesterday’s ruling of the House of Lords can be accessed here and here.

“Former Justice Descends Judicial Ladder, to Lower Court”: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, “Sandra Day O’Connor, the retired Supreme Court justice, gave a star turn yesterday as a visiting judge on a federal appeals court in Manhattan. But no one can accuse court officials of giving her the juiciest cases.”

The New York Sun reports today that “O’Connor Ends Retirement – for a Day.”

And The Associated Press reports that “O’Connor Is Guest Judge on Appeals Panel.”

Meanwhile, looking ahead to next week, Bob Egelko reports in The San Francisco Chronicle that “O’Connor temporarily back on bench, in S.F.”

“Court Won’t Hear Ex-Nun’s Bias Claims”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court is standing by its decision to refuse to hear a discrimination case involving a former nun who said she was forced to resign from her job at a Catholic university after helping expose a priest’s alleged misconduct.”

According to the article, “Petruska had wanted all judges on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear her case because a previous panel of appellate judges was about to render a decision in her favor last May until one of the judges died. On Tuesday, she was notified the court denied her request.”

My extensive earlier coverage of this case can be accessed via posts here and here.

“The Key Issue of Judicial Independence: With Conservatives’ Rhetoric Effective, and Supreme Court Justices Concerned, How Should Progressives Respond?” Edward Lazarus has this essay today at FindLaw.