“One of two escaped bank robbers nabbed on North Side”: The Chicago Tribune has this news update.

The Chicago Sun-Times has a news update headlined “Escapee Joseph ‘Jose’ Banks caught after daring jailbreak.”

And The Associated Press has a report headlined “FBI: 1 of 2 escaped Chicago inmates arrested.”

“Ky. court upholds decision in penis removal case”: The Associated Press has this report on an unpublished ruling that the Kentucky Court of Appeals issued today.

“Use of Death Sentences Continues to Fall in U.S.” Ethan Bronner has this article today in The New York Times.

“I Got a Second Chance After Robbing Banks — And Others Should, Too; After serving a 12 year prison sentence, the author was able to build a meaningful life; Today’s irrational laws are robbing young people of that opportunity”: Shon Hopwood has this essay online today at The Atlantic.

“‘Borking’ Before Bork”: Professor David Greenberg has this op-ed today in The New York Times.

“Judge dismisses suit challenging senate filibuster”: The Associated Press has this report.

At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella has a post titled “Judge Voids Challenge of Senate Filibuster Rule.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Filibuster challenge fails.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“Appeals court rules against Hobby Lobby in contraception coverage case; A Denver-based federal appeals court denied the retail chain’s bid to overturn a lower court’s ruling on a part of the federal health care law regarding insurance coverage for contraception”: The Oklahoman has this news update.

The contents of the December 2012 issue of the Harvard Law Review are now available online: You can access the contents via this link.

Under the heading “Recent Cases,” you can access items titled “First Circuit Invalidates Statute that Defines Marriage as Legal Union Between One Man and One Woman“; “Second Circuit Holds that Willful Blindness Is Knowledge in Digital Millennium Copyright Act Safe Harbor Provision“; and “D.C. Circuit Rejects Industry Challenges to New Greenhouse Gas Rules.”

Book giveaway update: I am pleased to report that, with three minutes to spare, this afternoon I received an email from a reader of this blog who was interested in receiving my review copy of the book “In the Name of Justice: Striving for the Rule of Law in China,” written by law professor He Weifang. Tomorrow, the book will be on its way, free-of-charge, by U.S. mail to this reader. If the reader chooses to provide me with a review of the book, I will consider posting it here at “How Appealing.”

“Borking Around”: Michael Dolan has this blog post online today at The New Republic. Back in 1987, Dolan wrote an article headlined “The Bork Tapes” for the Washington City Paper.

“Meat company sues feds over horse slaughterhouse”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Bank Robber’s Lawyer Pitches Supreme Court on Machine Gun Law”: Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Appeals court declines to rehear GHG-rule challenge, tees up case for Supreme Court”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has this report.

And the blog “D.C. Circuit Review” has a post titled “Greenhouse Gas Case Sparks Double Dissent from Denial of Rehearing En Banc.”

My earlier coverage of today’s D.C. Circuit order appears at this link.

Ninth Circuit holds that leases of land by San Diego to a nonprofit chartered by the Boy Scouts of America does not violate provisions of the California or U.S. Constitutions relating to the establishment of religion: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Asians: Too Smart for Their Own Good?” Northwestern University professor Carolyn Chen has this college admissions-related op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Remembering Bork: He was my teacher 30 years ago; I’ve spent my career proving him wrong.” Law professor Akhil Reed Amar has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The Gun Lobby’s Favorite Part Of The Health Law”: NPR has this blog post.

And at the “Opinionator” blog of The New York Times, University of Notre Dame philosophy professor Gary Gutting has a post titled “The N.R.A.’s Blockade on Science.”

“A conservative case for an assault weapons ban: If we can’t draw a sensible line on guns, we may as well call the American experiment in democracy a failure.” In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns (S.D. Cal.) has an op-ed that begins, “Last month, I sentenced Jared Lee Loughner to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in federal prison for his shooting rampage in Tucson.”

“Georgia Doctors Ask Judge to Halt Midterm Abortion Limits”: Bloomberg News has this report.

“Sirius XM Class-Action Settlement Upheld by Appeals Court”: Bloomberg News has this report on a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“EPA Carbon-Limits Challenge Won’t Get Court Rehearing”: Bloomberg News has this report on an order, accompanied by concurring and dissenting statements, that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.

“Unlikely Lame-Duck Vote in 1980 Still Reverberates”: Michelle Olsen has this post today at her “Appellate Daily” blog.

“Supreme Court’s niqab ruling must balance religious freedom, defendant rights”: Kirk Makin of The Toronto Globe and Mail has this preview of a ruling that the Supreme Court of Canada is expected to issue this morning.

And CBC News reports that “Top court to rule if witness can wear niqab in court; Woman wants to testify with her face covered in childhood sexual assault case.”

Update: You can access today’s ruling of Canada’s highest court at this link.

In early news coverage, Kirk Makin of The Toronto Globe and Mail has a news update headlined “Witness may be required to remove niqab while testifying: top court” that begins, “An Islamic witness may be required to remove her niqab veil to testify in court depending on the seriousness of the case and the intensity of her religious beliefs, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Thursday.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Canada rules on wearing religious veil in court.”

“Judge halts fed move to seize Hathaway’s Florida home; Delay may indicate justice ready to make deal on fraud charges”: Today’s edition of The Detroit News contains an article that begins, “A federal judge Wednesday temporarily halted attempts by the government to seize Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway’s home in Florida, a possible sign Hathaway is considering a deal in the controversial land transaction case.”

And The Detroit Free Press reports today that “Hathaway gets 90-day stay in battle over Florida home.”

“Why Didn’t Robert Bork Reach the Supreme Court? Because of politics, of course — and that’s fair enough.” Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner has this essay online at Slate.

And law professor Michael McConnell has a jurisprudence essay titled “What if Robert Bork Had Joined the Supreme Court? It probably would have been less politicized and more committed to the rule of law.”

“Supreme Court rulings limit options of gun-control task force”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

“Federal prosecutors involved in escapee’s case offered protection”: The Chicago Sun-Times has this news update.

And The Chicago Tribune has a news update headlined “FBI: Video shows escaped bank robbers getting into cab.”

“TSA Wants to Know if Airport Body Scanners Are Nuking You”: David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“Federal appeals court to hear claim by James ‘Whitey’ Bulger that judge is biased against him”: The Boston Globe has this news update.

“Fears of an Asian Quota in the Ivy League”: The New York Times has just posted online this “Room for Debate” discussion.

“Bork nomination fight altered judicial selection”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Leahy to remain chair of Judiciary; Feinstein of Intel”: CNN.com has this report.

“Postscript: Robert Bork, 1927-2012.” Jeffrey Toobin has this blog post online at The New Yorker.

Online at The New Republic, law professor Jeffrey Rosen has a blog post titled “We’re Still Paying the Price for the Borking of Robert Bork.”

And online at The Atlantic, Andrew Cohen has an essay titled “The Sad Legacy of Robert Bork: The late judge didn’t have a chance to move Supreme Court jurisprudence; But his failure to be confirmed had a profound and regrettable effect on how we nominate justices today.”

He writes a book, and I give it away to a reader of this blog who actually wants it: Yesterday’s mail contained a review copy of the book “In the Name of Justice: Striving for the Rule of Law in China,” written by law professor He Weifang (whose blog you can access here).

It is not for me to explain why I would receive a review copy of this book, instead of a review copy of a new book whose subject matter seems much more relevant to this blog, such as “Scalia and Garner’s Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts.”

Although my influence over the sort of books that people decide to send me apparently extends only so far, I have decided — beginning now — to ensure that any books that I receive that I am not inclined to read will be offered free of charge to a reader of this blog who actually wants the book.

Here are the rules: (1) This offer is open only to individuals who have a mailing address in the United States; (2) If you want the book, you must send me an email explaining why you want the book; (3) The person whom I choose to receive the book will have the opportunity to email me a two-paragraph review of the book due not later than 30 days after receiving the book, which I may choose to publish at “How Appealing” together with the reviewer’s name or (at a minimum) a description of the reviewer’s relevant qualifications; and (4) The person whom I choose to receive the book will need to provide me with his or her name and mailing address, either in the original email that they send or in response to my email advising that he or she has been selected to receive the book. This book being offered right now apparently retails for $34.95 and is not guaranteed to arrive in time for the holidays.

Any reader who is interested in receiving this book should send me an email that arrives at my blog’s email account (appellateblog@hotmail.com) between now and 4 p.m. eastern time on Thursday, December 20, 2012. The book may be mailed to the lucky winner of this giveaway on Friday, December 21, 2012. The selection of a recipient will be within the sole discretion of this blog’s author, and no appeals or original writs will be entertained.

“Michael Douglas watches NY appeals fight over son”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Michael Douglas has been watching from a New York courtroom audience as federal appeals judges consider the validity of his son’s nearly 10-year prison sentence for drug crimes.”