Programming note: Very early Thursday morning, I’ll be traveling from my home in the suburbs northwest of Philadelphia to Times Square in New York City to participate in a two-day continuing legal education seminar titled “Blog Law: Legal issues, liabilities, and new opportunities.” If all goes as planned, I’ll arrive at the CLE seminar before it gets underway at 8:30 a.m. I’m scheduled to be one of the presenters on Friday morning.

Also on the agenda: dinner Thursday night with PG of the “De Novo” blog; and breakfast Friday morning with Joe Goldstein of The New York Sun.

I look forward to meeting my fellow faculty members (listed on page 4 of the CLE seminar’s brochure) and also to visiting with any fans of “How Appealing” who happen to be in attendance.

I anticipate that a blog law CLE seminar will take place at a venue that offers wireless internet access. If that is indeed the case, additional entries will appear here on Thursday morning.

“Bush to Put Nominations Back on Table”: In Thursday’s issue of The New York Times, Neil A. Lewis will have an article that begins, “White House officials said Wednesday that President Bush would renominate six of his earlier choices to sit on the federal appeals court, leaving Democratic senators and other analysts to ponder what message he is sending. At least four of the nominations have been declared dead on arrival in the Senate by Democrats who have consistently opposed them as unacceptable.”

Legal Times has revamped its web page focusing on coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court: You can access the redesigned web page at this link. One of the new features is Tony Mauro’s “Recusal Report” (free access), examining the likely reasons why Justices have chosen to recuse from specific cases.

“Bush again puts forward controversial judge picks; 4th Circuit nominees blocked earlier given slim hope for approval”: This article will appear Thursday in The Richmond Times-Dispatch.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Texas appeals court rejects treaty violation argument” and “Judges express skepticism about abortion law infringing on speech.”

“Dominick’s Dunne it again, Condit says in defame suit”: This article appears today in The New York Daily News.

And McClatchy Newspapers report that “Condit again accuses author of defamation.”

“Bush Resubmits Six U.S. Appellate Court Nominees”: Bloomberg News provides this report.

And the official White House announcement is at this link.

“US argues harsh treatment shouldn’t undercut Padilla case”: Warren Richey will have this article Thursday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“White House Resubmits 6 Court Nominees”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Bush administration, trying to push through judicial nominations before Republicans lose control of the Senate, on Wednesday resubmitted the names of six nominees who Democrats say are too conservative for the federal bench.”

In commentary from CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen: In yesterday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, he had an op-ed entitled “The pledge’s refuge for scoundrels: Orange County kerfuffle aside, the Pledge of Allegiance comes with a long history of persecution.” My earlier coverage appears at this link.

And online at CBSNews.com, he has an essay entitled “Feds Want To Keep Torture A Secret: Administration Wants ‘Interrogation Methods’ Kept Secret From Suspects’ Lawyers.”

“Bush Wiretapping Program Violates Federal Laws and the Constitution, Says ACLU”: The ACLU yesterday issued a press release that begins, “The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Michigan today urged a federal appeals court to uphold a lower court ruling declaring the government’s warrantless National Security Agency wiretapping program illegal, calling the government’s assertion of unchecked spying powers ‘radical’ and a threat to American democracy.”

You can access the Brief for Appellees filed in the NSA wiretapping appeal, pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, by clicking here.

“Oral Agreement Could Supersede Ski Resort’s Release Form”: The Legal Intelligencer provides this news update (free access) reporting on a ruling that the Superior Court of Pennsylvania issued on Monday.

In re federal appellate judicial renominations: The “Committee for Justice Blog” reports here today that the White House will be renominating six federal appellate nominees whose nominations were returned due to lack of unanimous consent when the U.S. Senate last adjourned. And WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog reports similar news in a post titled “One More Time for Judicial Nominees.” No announcement of the renominations yet appears on the news release page of the White House’s web site.

In response to the renominations, Senate Judiciary Committee chair-to-be Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT) has today issued a statement that begins, “Barely a week after the President promised to change course by working in a bipartisan and cooperative way with Congress, it is disappointing that he has decided to ‘stay the course’ on judicial nominees by renominating a slate of his most controversial past choices.”

Access online the audio of today’s oral argument before the Supreme Court of Missouri in a case challenging the constitutional validity of a state law that prohibits assisting minors in obtaining abortions without parental consent: Via a post at Missourinet.com titled “Supreme Court Hears Abortion Law Challenge,” you can download an mp3 file consisting of the audio of today’s oral argument.

“Court of Appeals Officially Welcomes Newest Judges”: The Public Information Office of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued a news release that begins, “Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit officially welcomed their two newest colleagues earlier this month. Investiture ceremonies for Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta and Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr., were held on November 6 and 10, respectively, at the Richard H. Chambers U.S. Court of Appeals Building in Pasadena. Both judges came onto the bench last summer and currently maintain chambers in Pasadena.”

“Mixing Law With Politics: Chief Justice John Roberts explains why he opposes elections for federal judgeships.” FOXNews.com provides this video report (Windows Media Player required).

“Political motives suspected as jobs on bench go unfilled”: The Seattle Times today contains an article that begins, “Despite a process designed to keep politics out of judicial selections, some in the local legal community are wondering whether politics is behind a delay by the White House in filling two vacancies on the U.S. District Court in Western Washington. A seat on the federal bench in Tacoma has been open since March 2005, and a seat on the federal bench in Seattle opened in July.”

“Texas court rebuffs President on treaty powers”: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post that begins, “In a sharp rebuff of a claim of presidential power, Texas’ highest state criminal court ruled on Wednesday that President Bush did not have the constitutional authority to tell state courts to apply a decision of the World Court on the rights of foreign nationals arrested and prosecuted in the U.S.”

My coverage from earlier today can be accessed here.

“Superior Court rejects Einhorn’s appeal of murder conviction”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A former hippie guru convicted in 2002 of killing his girlfriend a quarter century earlier lost his appeal to a state court. A three-judge Superior Court panel rejected all 10 issues raised by Ira Einhorn, 66, who is serving life in prison without parole for the murder of girlfriend Holly Maddux of Tyler, Texas.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Justice Kennedy bobbleheads are here!” So proclaims the home page of The Green Bag’s web site.

And to remove all doubt, one is even up for auction online at eBay, where the current bid is a mere one dollar. Another Justice Kennedy bobblehead is also up for auction at eBay, with a minimum bid of $300.00.

Meanwhile, for those who’d prefer to bid on a Justice Stevens bobblehead, you too are in luck.

“Wu-Hoo! Nutty Professor Is Voice of a Generation.” Anna Schneider-Mayerson has this profile of Law Professor Tim Wu in the November 20, 2006 issue of The New York Observer.

Update: Via this post from Orin Kerr at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” I see that you can access the YouTube video referenced in The NYO profile by clicking here.

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, that State’s highest court in criminal cases, holds that President Bush was powerless to force the Texas judiciary to disregard its rules of procedural default to consider on the merits a Mexican death row inmate’s Article 36 Vienna Convention claim: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals today issued its ruling in Ex Parte Jose Ernesto Medellin. The ruling consists of a lead opinion and four separate concurring opinions. You can access the lead opinion at this link, while the concurring opinions can be accessed here, here, here, and here.

This case was previously considered on the merits by the Supreme Court of the United States. On May 23, 2005, the Court issued a 5-4 per curiam decision in which the majority opinion concluded:

In light of the possibility that the Texas courts will provide Medellin with the review he seeks pursuant to the Avena judgment and the President’s memorandum, and the potential for review in this Court once the Texas courts have heard and decided Medellin’s pending action, we think it would be unwise to reach and resolve the multiple hindrances to dispositive answers to the questions here presented. Accordingly, we dismiss the writ as improvidently granted.

In coverage of that ruling, Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times reported that “Supreme Court Drops Case Ruled on by World Court.” And Charles Lane of The Washington Post reported that “High Court Rejects Case of Mexican Death Row Inmate.”

Now, the possibility of state court review on which the U.S. Supreme Court’s majority relied in dismissing the writ as improvidently granted does not appear to have been achieved.

In earlier press coverage, Charles Lane of The Washington Post reported in March 2005 that “Texas Accuses Bush of Trampling Its Autonomy in Death Penalty Case.” And Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times reported in March 2005 that “Bush Decision to Comply With World Court Complicates Case of Mexican on Death Row.”

“Exultant Chuck Says He’ll Veto the Next Alito; New King of Washington Promises Moderate Court”: The November 20, 2006 issue of The New York Observer contains an article that begins, “More than the inability to influence Iraq policy or the President’s tax cuts, Chuck Schumer says that the single greatest failure of the Democrats as an opposition party was allowing Samuel Alito to join the Supreme Court.”

Two newly-elected Democratic Senators are slated to join the Senate Judiciary Committee: According to this news release, Senators-elect Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) will be joining the committee.

On the Republican side, Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) lost his reelection bid, so he will definitely be off the committee. One additional current Republican member of the committee will also be gone in January 2007 if the committee keeps its current 10 majority-8 minority division.

Update: A reader who’s in-the-know, pointing to this article published today in Roll Call, says that the new division on the Judiciary Committee will be 10 Democrats and 9 Republicans, meaning that other than with respect to Senator DeWine, the remaining current Republican members of the committee are likely to continue serving on the committee.

“Exit Strategy: Will Pentagon GC Follow Rumsfeld Out the Door?” law.com provides a report that begins, “In the wake of Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation as secretary of defense last week, the rumor mill is churning about the future of William Haynes II, the Pentagon’s general counsel.”

“Senate Dems wield more power over judge picks”: Ana Radelat of The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi provides a report that begins, “The Democratic takeover of the Senate has derailed President Bush’s efforts to put conservative judges on the federal bench and dooms the nomination of lawyer Michael Wallace for a federal appeals court seat, analysts say.”

And the Texas Lawyer reported on Monday that “Election Results Could Temper Bush’s 5th Circuit Picks” (via “Above the Law“).

“Missouri Court Hears Case on Abortion and Parental Consent”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition.”

Update: Via the Supreme Court of Missouri’s web site, you can access at this link (scroll down) a summary of the case and electronic copies of the appellate briefs filed with that court in the case.

“Judge wins $7 million in libel trial; Chief justice says Kane paper hurt his job prospects”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that “Top judge gets $7 mil.; Jury rules paper, columnist must pay in libel case.”

The Daily Herald of Arlington Heights, Illinois contains an article headlined “Why a jury gave chief justice $7 million: Judge wins libel lawsuit against newspaper.”

The Kane County Chronicle reports that “Judge wins $7 million verdict.”

And The New York Times reports that “Jury Finds That Columnist Acted With Malice and Awards Judge $7 Million.”

“The battle over same-sex marriage: Lockyer won’t oppose review; State’s high court likely to take case.” Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “State Attorney General Bill Lockyer’s office, which successfully defended California’s ban on same-sex marriage in an appellate court, said Tuesday it won’t oppose gay rights advocates’ requests that the state Supreme Court review the case.”

“Alcorn State men’s basketball team arrived at BankUnited Center early Tuesday and posed for photos with visiting U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.” So begins this article published today in The Miami Herald.

“Bring the Cuban terrorist to justice: The U.S. must not release a man accused of blowing up a Cuban jetliner; A third-party country could be the answer.” The Los Angeles Times today contains an editorial that begins, “It is time to bring Cuban terrorist Luis Posada Carriles to justice. Dithering on the part of the U.S. is leaving the nation open to charges of hypocrisy in the war on terror — specifically, to the charge that some forms of terrorism are more acceptable than others.”

“Anti-Asian bias alleged; Princeton faces suit from Univ. freshman”: The Yale Daily News today contains an article that begins, “A Yale freshman has filed a civil rights complaint against Princeton University, alleging that the college did not accept his application for enrollment last spring because he is Asian-American.”

And on Monday, The Daily Princetonian reported that “Rejected applicant alleges bias against Asians.”

“Justice Kennedy Presides at Law School; Law students face Supreme Court justice in Moot Trial Competition”: This article appears today in The Harvard Crimson.

“Democracy and same-sex marriage”: Jeff Jacoby has this op-ed today in The Boston Globe.

“Justice Department’s Brief On Detention Policy Draws Ire; Critics Say Law Could Allow Indefinite Jail Terms”: The Washington Post today contains an article that begins, “Critics of U.S. detention policies warned yesterday that a brief legal document filed by the Justice Department this week raises the possibility that any of the millions of immigrants living in the United States could be subject to indefinite detention if they are accused of ties to terrorist groups.”

You can access the brief online via Lyle Denniston’s post at “SCOTUSblog” titled “Another front on detainees’ rights.”