“Good judges: Voters should retain the best and let one go.” Today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains an editorial that begins, “Judicial retention elections, until quite recently, have been low-key and easily overlooked. Not this year, not after what happened in 2005. That’s when angry voters lashed out at the only statewide candidates on the ballot and threw Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro off the bench. They nearly did the same to Justice Sandra Schultz Newman, who was also on the ballot; she later resigned. That stunning election was a response to a middle-of-the-night pay raise enacted, then rescinded, by the Legislature and to a subsequent state Supreme Court ruling that upheld the increases for judges.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an editorial entitled “For Pa. Supreme Court: Todd and McCaffery.”

The Allentown Morning Call contains an editorial entitled “These candidates for appellate courts offer chance to restore their esteem.”

And yesterday’s issue of The Harrisburg Patriot-News contained an editorial entitled “Todd, Lally-Green deserve election to the Supreme Court.”

“Muslim Says Copies of Quran Confiscated”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press has an article that begins, “A Muslim inmate says prisoners around the country are regularly mistreated by their jailers because of religious faith. The Supreme Court is considering his case Monday. The issue in the inmate’s lawsuit is whether he can sue prison officials for allegedly confiscating two copies of his Quran and his prayer rug.”

“The Wiretap This Time”: Studs Terkel has this op-ed today in The New York Times.

“Kent, his accuser in same building”: Saturday’s edition of The Galveston County Daily News contained an article that begins, “The chief judge of the Southern District of Texas on Friday said he didn’t know when — or whether — Galveston would get a permanent federal judge. Meanwhile, it was hard to learn the reason why suspended U.S. District Judge Samuel B. Kent was removed Thursday as Galveston’s permanent judge. Some speculated it could be an attempt to inconvenience the judge and get him to resign. Others said it might be an attempt to avoid the appearance that some attorneys would receive favored treatment by filing cases in Galveston. Still others said it might be an attempt to retaliate against a court employee who transferred from Galveston after she made a sexual harassment complaint against the judge. Once he resumes hearing cases in January, Kent will be based primarily in Houston — in the same building with his accuser.”

Friday’s newspaper reported that “Galveston to keep court after Kent’s transfer.”

And in yesterday’s newspaper, columnist Heber Taylor had an op-ed entitled “Moving Kent a confusing and weak response.”

“Torturing Mukasey: The judge becomes a pawn in the politics of interrogation.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Bond Funds With $155 Billion Imperiled If U.S. Court Voids Law”: Greg Stohr and Jeremy R. Cooke of Bloomberg News have an article that begins, “Municipal-bond investors may be owed billions of dollars, and bond funds holding $155 billion rendered obsolete, as the result of a U.S. Supreme Court fight over state tax powers.”

“Why Does the U.S. Sentence Adolescents To Life Without Parole?” Sherry F. Colb has this essay today at FindLaw.