“Supreme Court’s Murky Clean Water Act Ruling Created Legal Quagmire”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire today has an article — the first in a three-part series — that begins, “Lawyers rarely agree on anything, but here’s an exception: They all say the Supreme Court bungled Rapanos v. United States, a major wetlands case, almost five years ago.”

“Philly tour guides can’t sue, for now, over tests”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Tour guides upset over a rule that would require them to pass a test to lead visitors around Philadelphia can’t proceed with a free-speech lawsuit while the tests are on hold because of budget woes.”

You can access today’s non-precedential ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link.

“Deadlocked Finality on (and for?) the Alien Tort Statute at the Second Circuit”: Richard Samp has this post today at “The Legal Pulse” blog of the Washington Legal Foundation.

“The majority seems to imagine ‘probable cause’ as a cloud that follows certain people around, created by their idiosyncratic habits and irresponsible friends, and persisting even though the individuals are not suspected of any particular crime.” So begins the opinion of Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon, dissenting from the ruling that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

The opening paragraph of Judge Berzon’s dissent continues:

This “probable cause” cloud, the majority imagines, is available for invocation by law enforcement to justify virtually any search. But, as the case law makes clear, probable cause does not exist in the air. And probable cause to think that someone is odd or a slob or that his friend is a negligent father does not justify seizing and searching his computers.

The final substantive paragraph of Judge Berzon’s dissent begins, “I cannot help but think that had this case involved anything but child pornography, it would come out differently.”

Because the deciding vote on the three-judge panel was provided by a senior U.S. District Judge visiting from outside of the Ninth Circuit, this case may have a better than average prospect for rehearing en banc.

“Md.’s wine shipment laws create smuggling routes from D.C. and Va.” This article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Loudoun judge defies Va. Supreme Court, continues to reopen immigrants’ cases”: Tom Jackman has this article today in The Washington Post.

“The Information: How the Internet gets inside us.” Adam Gopnik has this “A Critic at Large” essay in the February 14, 2011 issue of The New Yorker.

“Judges: Senate should confirm Graves.” The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contains this editorial today.

“Personal Privacy and the Right to Know”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

“Badger Catholic case may go to U.S. Supreme Court”: The Daily Cardinal, the student newspaper of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, contains this article today.

“Justice talks possible health care repeal case”: Today’s edition of The GW Hatchet contains an article that begins, “Americans should not expect a case examining the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s health care law to be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Thursday night.”

At Newsweek.com, columnist Ezra Klein has an essay entitled “The Justice Will See You Now: The fate of Obama’s health-care law may rest with one man.”

And at National Review Online, Robert VerBruggen has an essay entitled “An Obamacare Roadblock: Does the Florida court ruling shut down implementation?”

“Patrick’s choices may change little on SJC”: The Boston Globe today contains an article that begins, “With yet another vacancy opening this spring, Deval Patrick has an opportunity to put a bigger stamp on the Supreme Judicial Court than any governor since Francis W. Sargent in the 1970s. But Patrick, over the long run, is unlikely to transform the ideological imprint of a bench that, even when dominated by Republican appointees, became the first high court in the nation to legalize gay marriage.”