“Court reverses New Mexico ban on US Airways booze”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Friday reversed a judge’s decision that prevented US Airways from serving alcohol on its New Mexico flights after a passenger killed five people in a drunken-driving crash.”

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

“Justice selection process defended”: Today in The Des Moines Register, Grant Schulte has an article that begins, “Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins maintained Thursday that the state’s merit-based judge selection system is the best way to pick fair and qualified jurists, regardless of which governor sits in office or who serves on the panel that picks finalists for the bench.”

“Viacom Says YouTube Ruling Will ‘Completely Destroy’ Copyright”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

You can access at this link the opening brief that Viacom filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

“Election Hangover: The real legacy of Bush v. Gore.” Law professor Richard L. Hasen has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Justice Sotomayor Recusal Likely as Supreme Court Weighs Greenhouse Gas ‘Nuisance’ Case”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has this report.

Blog references, on appeal: An order that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday denying a petition for rehearing contains the following quotation from a petition for rehearing that was previously denied at an earlier stage of the appellate process in that same case:

[T]he Panel’s opinion reads more like a posting in its author’s well-known blog (www.becker-posner-blog.com), declaring its view of class actions, mischaracterizing class counsel as being inherently corrupted by the inducement to sell out its clients’ small claims for its own fees obtained through a collusive settlement.

It can be tempting to use a petition for appellate rehearing or reconsideration as a forum to vent one’s frustrations with the adverse result received on appeal, but in my experience that temptation should be avoided.

“Ginni Thomas: I’m not leaving my Tea Party organization.” The Daily Caller has this report.

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Virginia Thomas in New Role at Liberty Central, Says Call to Anita Hill Was ‘Probably a Mistake.'”

“Viacom appeals ruling in YouTube copyright case”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Justice Thomas’ wife takes less public role”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Virginia Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, is giving up her role as the head of a conservative advocacy group that has worked with the Tea Party movement.”

“Roberts Court Long On Words, Short On Clarity”: This audio segment featuring Adam Liptak appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Fresh Air from WHYY.”

“Judge refuses to withdraw from same-sex marriage case; Stephen Reinhardt says he can be impartial in the case appealing a decision that California’s gay marriage ban is unconstitutional”: Carol J. Williams has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Judge refuses to step aside in Prop. 8 case.”

The Washington Times reports that “Prop 8 judge refuses to recuse himself.”

law.com reports that “Reinhardt Says He Won’t Step Off Prop 8 Case.”

And Bloomberg News columnist Ann Woolner has an essay entitled “Clarence Thomas Is Model for Gay Marriage Case.”

“Judge Thomas Porteous impeachment trial summary released”: Bruce Alpert had this article last month in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans. You can access the report of the Senate Impeachment Trial Committee by clicking here.

According to a related article, the U.S. Senate is scheduled to vote next week on whether to remove U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. from office.

“Justice Unbound”: At the “Opinionator” blog of The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse has a post that begins, “Watching the post-retirement emergence of Justice John Paul Stevens is almost enough to make me a fan of term limits for Supreme Court justices.”