“Does the Government Deserve Your DNA? The crucial privacy case before the Supreme Court.” Law professor Jeffrey Rosen has this essay online today at The New Republic.

“Sotomayor, Kagan ready for battles”: Columnist Dana Milbank will have this op-ed Thursday in The Washington Post.

“Voting Rights Law Draws Skepticism From Justices”: Adam Liptak will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

In Thursday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Supreme Court conservatives express skepticism over voting law provision.”

In Thursday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage and David Lauter will have an article headlined “Supreme Court voices skepticism about Voting Rights Act; Conservative justices question whether racial discrimination remains a problem and therefore whether a section of the historic 1965 law unfairly restricts Southern states today.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has an article headlined “Voting Act Under Scrutiny; Justices Weigh Challenge to Federal Oversight of Some States’ Electoral Practices.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that “Supreme Court to decide future of Voting Rights Act.”

The Birmingham News has reports headlined “U.S. Supreme Court justices point to need for Voting Rights Act in Shelby County case” and “Voting Rights Act supporters travel from Shelby County to attend U.S. Supreme Court case.”

The Washington Times has an article headlined “Conservative court justice: Voting rights law perpetuates ‘racial entitlement.’”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Voting Rights Act case: Supreme Court questioning is lively, pointed.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com has a blog post titled “Justices offer split views on Voting Rights Act enforcement.”

At the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post titled “Justices Weigh Future of Key Voting Rights Act Section.”

This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment titled “Conservative Justices Skeptical Of Key Part Of Voting Law” featuring Nina Totenberg.

This evening’s broadcast of The PBS NewsHour contained segments titled “Supreme Court Hears Arguments Against Key Provision of Voting Rights Act” and “Is Discrimination History Provision of Voting Rights Act Still Relevant?”

And online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a Supreme Court dispatch titled “Is the South Still Racist? The Supreme Court’s conservatives seem to think the answer is no — and that the Voting Rights Act has outlived its purpose.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96.

“Argentina Says It Won’t Voluntarily Comply With Bond Ruling”: Bloomberg News has this report on a case argued today before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

“Justices Appear Skeptical Over a Challenge to Required Arbitration”: Binyamin Appelbaum will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

And Tom Schoenberg of Bloomberg News reports that “Amex Policy Reopens High Court Debate on Arbitration.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12-133.

“Appeals court panel rejects constitutional challenge to Mississippi’s noneconomic damages cap”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued today.

“Court Won’t Let Terrorism Victims Claim Persian Artifacts From Harvard”: The Chronicle of Higher Education has this blog post about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued today.

“Judge sets May 7 sentencing for Joan Orie Melvin”: The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has this news update.

“DOJ: Dismiss Suit Over Supreme Court Visitor’s ‘Occupy Everywhere’ Jacket.” Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Circuit Nominee Enjoys Extra Friendly Reception at Senate Committee Hearing”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Todd Ruger has a post that begins, “Jane Kelly got an extra friendly reception from the Senate Judiciary Committee at her confirmation hearing Wednesday for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, soaking up a stream of compliments and fielding questions about why diversity in the courts is important.”

“Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to FISA Amendments Act; EFF’s Lawsuit Over NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Remains”: The Electronic Frontier Foundation has this blog post today.

U.S. Senate confirmation is not required for this appointment to take effect: The University of Pennsylvania Law School today issued a news release titled “Federal Judge Anthony J. Scirica appointed to Penn Law faculty.”

According to the news release, “Upon assuming his Penn law position, he will take senior status” at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Programming note: I will be away from the computer this afternoon to meet with trial counsel in connection with an appeal on which I may be working. Consequently, additional posts will appear here this evening.

Once the U.S. Supreme Court posts online the transcript of this morning’s oral argument in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, No. 12-96, you will be able to access the transcript via this link.

“Sixth Circuit weigh in with instructions on restitution sentencing in child porn cases”: At his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Douglas A. Berman has this post about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.

“Voting rights law gets Supreme Court challenge”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Voting Rights Act Questioned as Top Court Weighs Rollback.”

Adam Liptak of The New York Times has a news update headlined “Conservative Justices Voice Skepticism on Voting Law.”

David G. Savage and David Lauter of The Los Angeles Times have a news update headlined “Supreme Court justices sharply divided in Voting Rights Act case.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act; The case is sandwiched between several other civil rights cases in a Supreme Court term that could be even more consequential than the previous one, when President Obama’s health care law was salvaged.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Conservatives on high court cast doubt on voting law.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument recap: Voting law in peril — maybe.”

And Sahil Kapur of TPM DC reports that “Conservative Justices Hammer The Voting Rights Act.”

“Appeals court voids Encore debt settlement”: Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Tuesday voided a controversial $5.2 million settlement intended to resolve allegations that Encore Capital Group Inc used false affidavits and other illegal tactics to collect debts from 1.44 million consumers.”

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

“Superior Court opens its doors at Northampton County College to veterans and students”: Peter Hall has this article today in The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania.

“Brief Supporting Same-Sex Marriage Gets More Republican Support”: This article will appear in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Justice Souter: Working in Reverse, by Choice.” Michelle Olsen has this post today at her “Appellate Daily” blog.

Access online today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court today issued two decisions in argued cases.

1. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a concurring opinion. Justice Antonin Scalia issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joined in full and Justice Scalia joined in part. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. And Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Gabelli v. SEC, No. 11-1274. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: No extra time to sue for securities fraud.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Securities-Fraud Suits Backed by Supreme Court in Amgen Case” and “SEC Must File Fraud Suits Sooner, U.S. Supreme Court Rules.”

And Lawrence Hurley and David Ingram of Reuters report that “Supreme Court rules against Amgen in class action” and “Supreme Court limits SEC authority to seek penalties.”

“Ohio court hearing arguments in school Bible case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Attorneys for a fired public school science teacher who kept a Bible on his desk plan to argue before the Ohio Supreme Court that the teacher’s dismissal was unconstitutional.”

The case is scheduled for oral argument today in the Supreme Court of Ohio. That court’s Public Information Office has prepared a summary of the case headlined “Did Public School Teacher’s Firing for Presenting Religious Doctrine In Science Class Violate His Free Speech Rights? Suit Alleges School Board Policy Barring Teaching of Creationism Is Unconstitutional.”

The teacher case is the second case scheduled for oral argument this morning. The summary of the first case scheduled for oral argument is headlined “May Plaintiff Pursuing Civil Claim Based on Alleged Sexual Assault File Suit and Proceed Under ‘John Doe’ Pseudonym? Does Intimate Nature of Conduct Support Exception to Rule Requiring Use of Real Name.”

The court provides a live video stream of the oral arguments beginning at 9 a.m eastern time at this link.

“Voting Act Challenge Hinges on a Formula”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Voting rights law gets Supreme Court challenge.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Weighs Future Of Voting Rights Act” featuring Nina Totenberg.

And online at Mother Jones, Adam Serwer has an article headlined “Chief Justice Roberts’ Long War Against the Voting Rights Act: Roberts has been a critic of the Voting Rights Act for 30 years; Now he will help decide whether the law’s most important section lives or dies.”

“Supreme Court questions sides in challenge of Md. DNA law; Ruling from justices could come in a few months”: This article appears today in The Baltimore Sun.

The Daily Times of Salisbury, Maryland reports today that “DNA decision to affect nation; Wicomico case heard by Supreme Court.”

Adam Liptak of The New York Times reports that “Justices Wrestle Over Allowing DNA Sampling at Time of Arrest.”

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court weighs DNA ‘fingerprinting.’”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Justices closely split on routine DNA sampling by police.”

And yesterday evening’s broadcast of The PBS NewsHour contained a segment titled “Case on Police Collecting DNA From Criminals Reaches Supreme Court” featuring Marcia Coyle.

“Central Va. psychic loses appeal to US panel”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued yesterday.

And at “walshsblog,” Kevin C. Walsh has a post titled “Fourth Circuit rejects psychic’s free speech and free exercise challenges to Chesterfield County (VA) regulatory scheme.”

In earlier coverage, The Richmond Times-Dispatch previously reported that “‘Psychic Sophie’ takes constitutional case to appeals court.”

Breaking Bad, starring Mr, Dude: Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch issued this opinion yesterday on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The opinion begins, “Harald Dude’s real estate dealings began breaking bad in 2003.”