Blog & News Round-Up – Tuesday, December 20th

The New York Times has this article on the fact that, despite a Supreme Court holding prohibiting the execution of the mentally retarded, the Fifth Circuit has held that a Texas death row inmate who may be retarded cannot raise the issue in federal court because his lawyer missed a filing deadline. The cases is also discussed by the Houston Chronicle and Dallas News.

Here is Concurring Opinions and the Volokh Conspiracy on the constitutionality of warrantless NSA surveillance. Balkinization has a series of posts on the issue. Here is the most recent.

The Campaign Legal Center has posted the briefs from Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC.

In Slate, here is Rick Hasen with commentary on why the Court’s agreeing to hear the Texas redistricting case might not be good for Democrats.

This week, the Legal Affairs Debate Club asks, “When Can Congress Remove Judges?” Article III of the Constitution says that judges “shall hold their offices during good behavior.” To remove misbehaving judges, the Constitution specifies the process of impeachment, but this hasn’t stopped members of Congress from trying to figure out how else to get rid of judges they don’t like. Debating whether or not this is acceptable are Todd D. Peterson, Professor of Law at The George Washington University Law School and Saikrishna B. Prakash, Herzog Research Professor of Law at University of San Diego Law School.

In nomination news:

Here is a report issued by Yale Law students and faculty on the “Alito Opinions.”