“Dream court for American business”: Thursday’s edition of Financial Times contains an editorial that begins, “Corporate America has scored a hat-trick in the US Supreme Court, winning a trio of big cases that could substantially reduce the amount of cripplingly costly investor litigation faced by any company that lists on US soil.”

“Supreme Court Rebuffs a Challenge to New York’s Way of Picking Its Judges”: Linda Greenhouse will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

And law.com reports that “U.S. Supreme Court Upholds New York State’s Judicial Election System.”

“If the Yoo Fits… Why shouldn’t Jose Padilla sue John Yoo?” Emily Bazelon has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

And today in The Philadelphia Inquirer, John Yoo has an op-ed entitled “Terror suspects are waging ‘lawfare’ on U.S.”

Does the U.S. Olympic Committee’s policy of awarding benefits to athletes training for the Olympics or the Pan American Games while excluding those training for the Paralympic Games unlawfully discriminate against the disabled? By a vote of 2-1, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit answers “no” in this decision issued today.

“Appeals court wants more info on Qwest settlement”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “A U.S. district judge must explain why he approved a $400 million payout by Qwest Communications International Inc to settle a class-action lawsuit filed by shareholders, a federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday.”

You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in an appeal filed by former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio and former Qwest CFO Robert Woodruff, at this link.

Access online today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument transcripts: You can now access the transcripts from today’s two argued cases, Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., No. 06-937, and MeadWestvaco Corp. v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue, No. 06-1413.

“Stoneridge Sanity: The most important case you never heard of.” Robert Alt and Brian Walsh have this essay today at National Review Online.

“The able lawyers who briefed and argued this case could have saved us some work and presented their positions more effectively had they done the translations from reinsurancese into everyday English themselves.” Can Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner make an opinion deciding an appeal involving reinsurance both interesting and understandable? The answer seems to be yes.

For example, earlier in the opinion, Judge Posner writes:

One who voluntarily confers a benefit on another, which is to say in the absence of a contractual obligation to do so, ordinarily has no legal claim to be compensated. If while you are sitting on your porch sipping Margaritas a trio of itinerant musicians serenades you with mandolin, lute, and hautboy, you have no obligation, in the absence of a contract, to pay them for their performance no matter how much you enjoyed it; and likewise if they were gardeners whom you had hired and on a break from their gardening they took up their musical instruments to serenade you. When voluntary transactions are feasible (in economic parlance, when transaction costs are low), it is better and cheaper to require the parties to make their own terms than for a court to try to fix them–better and cheaper that the musicians should negotiate a price with you in advance than for them to go running to court for a judicial determination of the just price for their performance.

Perhaps the reinsurance lawyers were thinking that if Judge Posner was familiar with the musical instrument known as the hautboy, he’d be quite well-versed in obscure reinsurance terms as well.

“U.S. Supreme Court Reinstates New York Election Rules”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News provides this report.

“Business of blogging: How to make it work.” This Reuters report from Monday mentions “SCOTUSblog.”

“Court May Limit Patent Owners’ Rights”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared ready to make it harder for patent owners to demand licensing fees from companies throughout the manufacturing supply chain.”

“Senators Hope to Ban Judges from Educational Junkets”: Lawrence Hurley has this front page article today in The Daily Journal of California.

“Supreme Court Upholds N.Y. Judicial Selection”: Joseph Goldstein of The New York Sun provides this news update.

Nina Totenberg is reporting: On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” she had an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Blocks Suits by Defrauded Investors.”

And on yesterday evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered,” she had an audio segment entitled “High Court Rules Against Investors in Fraud Case.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

Was the alienation of affection judgment that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit previously upheld based on the wife’s allegedly untruthful testimony motivated by a desire to keep from losing her children and marriage? We may never know for certain, as today the Eighth Circuit issued this opinion holding that the defendant’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) to reopen the case was filed too late.

“In this appeal, we address whether an elementary school student has a First Amendment right to promote an unsolicited religious message during an organized curricular activity.” A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit answers “no” in this decision issued today.

“Engaging in Sexual Activities With a Patient Is Not Within the Scope of Employment of a Therapist”: So holds the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit today, in an opinion applying Kentucky law.

“No need for primary to pick judges”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

The U.S. Supreme Court today issued its ruling in New York State Board of Elections v. Lopez Torres, No. 06-766. You can access the opinion at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

Today’s second and final opinion in an argued case issued in Knight v. Commissioner, No. 06-1286. You can access the opinion at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court Upholds NY Judicial Elections” and “Court Limits Trusts’ Tax Deductions.”

“Inquisition at JPL: The government shouldn’t be prying into the personal lives of its scientists.” Today in The Los Angeles Times, columnist Tim Rutten has this op-ed.

“Judge hard on Padilla, co-defendants in first phase; She rules he should face 30 years to life”: This article appears today in The South Florida Sun-Sentinel.

The Los Angeles Times today contains an article headlined “Judge: Terror suspects will get 30 to life; She rejects pleas for leniency for alleged ‘dirty bomb’ plotter Jose Padilla and two others convicted of support of terrorism.”

And yesterday in The Miami Herald, Jay Weaver had an article headlined “Life sentence looms for Padilla; A federal judge in Miami is likely to slap Jose Padilla and two other men convicted of terror-conspiracy charges with long prison sentences.”

“Locking up kids for life: California can sentence criminals under 18 to life without parole; It’s cruel and unusual punishment.” The Los Angeles Times contains this editorial today.

“Blake lawyer says civil trial was unfair; Appellate court is urged to overturn a $30-million award”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“My First Post — Crime Victim’s Right to Be Heard”: Law Professor, and former U.S. District Judge, Paul Cassell has this post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“In Child Porn Case, a Digital Dilemma; U.S. Seeks to Force Suspect to Reveal Password to Computer Files”: The Washington Post today contains a front page article that begins, “The federal government is asking a U.S. District Court in Vermont to order a man to type a password that would unlock files on his computer, despite his claim that doing so would constitute self-incrimination. The case, believed to be the first of its kind to reach this level, raises a uniquely digital-age question about how to balance privacy and civil liberties against the government’s responsibility to protect the public.”

“Station Chief Made Appeal To Destroy CIA Tapes; Lawyer Says Top Official Had Implicit Approval”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Supreme Court Limits Lawsuits by Shareholders”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes and Carrie Johnson report that “Corporate Fraud Lawsuits Restricted; Enron and Other Shareholders Limited by Court.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Ruling limits reach of investor suits; The Supreme Court decision in a cable firm’s fraud case is a victory for businesses.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Congress, hold companies accountable: The Supreme Court ruled that companies aiding and abetting Enron-style fraud can’t be held liable.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic and Edward Iwata report that “Investors lose in court ruling; Third parties can’t be held liable in corporate fraud.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court keeps investor suits narrow; In a 5-to-3 ruling, justices say firms that merely abetted fraud can’t be sued.”

And The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial entitled “A Win for Investors.”

“All-white jury seated for Snipes; Defense team confident panel will ‘seek the truth'”: This article appears today in The Ocala Star-Banner.

And The St. Petersburg Times reports today that “All-white jury ready for Snipes’ tax trial; The lead defense attorney says he has faith in the panel.”

“Diane Keaton swears on TV, FCC stammers”: Via Reuters, Hollywood Reporter has an article that begins, “The nation’s top TV regulator said it would be difficult for the Federal Communications Commission to take action against ABC stations that aired ‘Good Morning America’ on Tuesday when actress Diane Keaton used the f-word.”

“Appeal of the court: Yearlong celebration in store for historic federal courthouse.” Today in The Providence (R.I.) Journal, Edward Fitzpatrick has an article that begins, “U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts is scheduled to visit Rhode Island on Feb. 12 to help celebrate the centennial of the federal courthouse in downtown Providence. The event will mark the first time a sitting Supreme Court chief justice has come to the state since Charles Evan Hughes was here in 1937, said Senior Circuit Judge Bruce M. Selya, a Rhode Islander who is the liaison for Roberts’ visit. Newspaper articles indicate that Hughes, an 1881 Brown University graduate, came to see his grandson graduate from Brown.”

“The Supreme Court Club”: The New York Times today contains an editorial that concludes, “It would still be best if the court moved on its own to allow coverage of oral arguments similar to C-Span’s valuable coverage of the House and Senate. Since Mr. Roberts and his camera-averse colleagues show no signs of budging, Congress needs to force the issue.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “ACLU: Sex in Restroom Stalls Is Private” and “Snipes’ Lawyer May Be Ineligible.”

“Justices Get Another Shot at Patent Law”: Jess Bravin and Justin Scheck have this article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“The punishment fits the times”: Law Professor Jonathan Turley has this death penalty-related op-ed today in USA Today.

“Criminal cases stripped from Kent’s docket; It now contains only civil matters”: The Houston Chronicle today contains an article that begins, “Federal judge Samuel Kent, who recently returned to work after a four-month paid leave of absence, has had his docket stripped of all criminal cases.”

“Quanta-LG Case at U.S. Supreme Court May Limit Patent Royalties”: Greg Stohr and Susan Decker of Bloomberg News provide this report.