“Series shines a light on Supreme Court”: The San Jose Mercury News today contains this review of the PBS program “The Supreme Court,” scheduled to air this Wednesday night and next Wednesday night.

I have collected additional reviews in posts you can access here and here.

“Case pits bald eagle against sacred rites; American Indian tests strict federal protection”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

“Woman’s crusade against bar spawns free speech case; Anne Lemen just wants to say what she pleases about a Balboa Island restaurant and bar; A court has forbidden her to, and that sets up a dispute over prior restraint”: Today in The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan has an article that begins, “The most important free speech case now before the California Supreme Court carries neither the heft of the Pentagon Papers nor the emotion of Nazis seeking to march in Skokie, Ill.”

In news from the Iowa Microsoft consumer antitrust class action trial: The Des Moines Register last week published articles headlined “1,100 opted out of Microsoft suit; Some individuals, businesses, schools and nonprofits show support for software maker” and “Judge prohibits questions on Conlin’s ties to plaintiffs; The ruling is a blow for Microsoft in the Iowa class-action lawsuit.”

You can access the trial transcripts via this link.

“Stay extends death-row record”: The Washington Times today contains an article that begins, “The man who has been on the Texas death row longer than anyone else in history was saved from scheduled execution last week by the U.S. Supreme Court with no specific reasons given for the intervention.”

“Author Takes On Civil Liberties Of 1812”: The Hartford Courant today contains an article that begins, “Matthew Warshauer is not entirely happy that his first book – a study of Andrew Jackson’s suspension of civil liberties in wartime – has gotten national attention. On the one hand, he was excited to read the 5,000-word review in last week’s New Yorker that calls his book ‘lucid and well-researched.’ On the other hand, Warshauer understands that his book’s popularity is tied to post-Sept. 11 civil liberties violations.”

I previously linked here to that review.

“Potshot at Guantanamo lawyers backfires; Big firms laud free legal aid for detainees”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

“Home Is Where Her Hog Is; A couple of years ago, a petrified little pig escaped the butcher, thanks to its new owner; Now the Herndon woman is fighting a zoning law to keep her 140-pound pet at her house”: The Washington Post contains this article today.

“Courts Turn to Wikipedia, but Selectively”: This interesting article appears today in The New York Times.

I mentioned this phenomenon in the July 24, 2006 installment of my weekly “On Appeal” column for law.com headlined “Viewing Law Blogs as a Vast Amicus Brief.”

“Congress, the Constitution and War: The Limits on Presidential Power.” Adam Cohen has this Editorial Observer essay today in The New York Times.

“Google’s Moon Shot: The quest for the universal library.” Jeffrey Toobin has this “Annals of Law” article in the February 5, 2007 issue of The New Yorker.

Yesterday morning, I linked here to a PDF version of this article.

“Blawg Review #93”: Available here, at “Cyberlaw Central.”

Available online at FindLaw: Michael C. Dorf has an essay entitled “Universities Adjust to State Affirmative Action Bans: Are the New Programs Legal? Are They a Good Idea?”

And Carl Tobias has an essay entitled “Why Congress Needs to Probe the NSA Domestic Surveillance Program: The Bush Administration’s Promise to Secure Prior Warrants Is a Positive Step, But Oversight is Required.”

“Weighing the Consequences of Telling Others the Truth”: Adam Liptak will have this column (TimesSelect temporary pass-through link) in Monday’s edition of The New York Times focusing on the D.C. Circuit‘s en banc oral argument this past week in the lawsuit captioned Boehner v. McDermott.

“Murphy and the Sixteenth Amendment in Relation to the Taxation of Non-Excludable Personal Injury Awards”: Law Professor Joseph M. Dodge has posted this essay (abstract with links for download) online at SSRN (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

If there were ever any reason to doubt whether the three-judge panel that originally decided this case was seriously in error, Professor Dodge’s article should remove all doubt. At the article’s conclusion states at its outset, “The Murphy panel decision should not only be reversed, but it should be condemned in the strongest terms.” Fortunately, the three-judge D.C. Circuit panel whose decision is the subject of Professor Dodge’s article has recently granted panel rehearing to reconsider that ruling.

My earlier coverage of that ruling, and links to other web-based commentary, can be accessed here, here, here, and here.

“Conservative Judicial Activism? Inventing a constitutional right to ‘medical self-defense.'” Law Professor Robert F. Nagel will have this essay in the February 5, 2007 issue of The Weekly Standard.

“Recent Supreme Court rulings affect local trial; Buttons banned, judge mulls sentencing issue”: This article appears today in The Monterey County Herald.

“A Pillar of American Justice”: In the February 12, 2007 issue of The Nation, Charles A. Miller will have an essay that begins, “A great American was born 150 years ago. His name was Louis Brandeis. From 1916 to 1939, he served on the US Supreme Court.”

“Taps: How do you make Alberto Gonzales stop lying?” This editorial will appear in the February 5, 2007 issue of The New Republic.

“Effort to make court arguments confidential smacks of ‘Robitis'”: Glenn Gilbert has this op-ed today in The Oakland Press of Pontiac, Michigan.

“Judge ‘Supreme Court’ on merits, not on its limits”: The Orlando Sentinel today contains this review of the PBS program “The Supreme Court,” due to air this Wednesday.

The Oregonian today contains a review headlined “Don’t rush to judgment on ‘The Supreme Court’; The PBS special, which covers the institution’s complex history and issues, really is exciting stuff.”

The Arizona Republic contains a review headlined “5 reasons to watch PBS’ ‘Supreme Court.’”

And The Honolulu Advertiser reports that “KHET to air discussions tied to ‘Supreme Court.’”

I previously linked here to Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David J. Garrow’s review of the television program and related book.

I have watched on DVD the first two hours of the PBS program, and I enjoyed the second hour more than the first. Those first two hours are scheduled to air together this Wednesday, with the final two hours of the broadcast scheduled to air one week later.

Update: The DePaulia reports that “Law to share insight in television series.”

And Indiana University has posted online a press release headlined “IU law professor to appear on PBS’ ‘The Supreme Court.’”

“The Truth About Clarence Thomas: He’s an independent voice, not a Scalia lackey.” This op-ed by ABC News correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg, which originally appeared in last Monday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, is now freely available online at this link via OpinionJournal.

Jan’s tour in support of her new book takes her to the Chicago area tomorrow and Tuesday.

“Are Prisons Driving Prisoners Mad?” This article will appear in the February 5, 2007 issue of Time magazine.

“Libby trial shows unsealed lips in CIA; Though the agency has sought to protect covert identities, the leak case reveals that the secrecy rules are sometimes ignored”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Convict’s slow road to death; Ronald Chambers’ lethal injection date has been delayed more than 30 years as the legal process takes its course”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Church-state ‘wall’ coming back down?” The Washington Times contains this article today.

“From Court To Jester: Without Dissent, Alfalfa Club Honors Sandra Day O’Connor.” This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“In the Penalty Phase, All One’s Secrets Revealed”: According to an article published today in The New York Times, “The degree of scrutiny afforded a capital defendant is enough to mortify anyone who has ever been a child, dated a girl, gotten a haircut or tried to dress fashionably. This is the full probe. All your secrets revealed. Some defendants consider it either more agonizing than death, a sentence no federal jury in New York has prescribed for a half-century, or at least worth a big gamble to avoid.”

“Scalia Dons the Robes of a Scholar for a Day”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

“Google’s Moon Shot: The quest for the universal library.” Jeffrey Toobin will have this “Annals of Law” article in the February 5, 2007 issue of The New Yorker.

“Free speech at hub of judge, panel clash; Jurist argues that Constitution, court ruling protect his off-the-bench remarks”: The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette today contains an article that begins, “In his fight with the state panel that disciplines judges, Appeals Court Judge Wendell Griffen claims his controversial political remarks are protected by a U.S. Supreme Court decision. The outspoken jurist isn’t the first to claim the 2002 decision, Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, shields speech by judges when they are off the bench. Legal scholars say a broad interpretation of the court’s opinion could save Griffen from censure, but the few courts in other states that have tested the decision haven’t always been sympathetic to those claims, at least when cases center on campaign promises made by candidates for judgeships, a situation a little different from Griffen’s case.”

“Mack loses control of family trust”: The Reno Gazette-Journal today contains an article that begins, “A family trust that Darren Mack set up for his three children was taken out of his control and placed under the administration of a man who helped murder victim Charla Mack try to get Mack’s assets during their divorce, according to a state judge’s order. Mack’s lawyer, Mark Wray, immediately appealed the ruling to the Nevada Supreme Court.”

And in somewhat related news, The Associated Press reported on Wednesday that “Reid makes courthouse security priority after Reno sniper attack.”

“Abortion loophole or legal prudence? The mental-health exception to limits on late-term procedures was key to Kline’s case.” The Kansas City Star today contains an article that begins, “Sometime in August 2003, a 22-year-old woman had an abortion in Wichita. She was seven months pregnant. Her name and her story are unknown. But the reason her doctor gave to justify the late-term abortion is now at the center of Kansas’ abortion debate. That reason: The woman was seriously depressed.”

“Rell says she will name a new chief justice nominee soon”: The AP provides this report from Connecticut.

“Abortion doctor continues his fight”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Abortion doctor LeRoy Carhart is entrenched in what he calls a ‘never-ending battle’ – one that anti-abortion advocates have strongly urged him to surrender.”