“Santa Cruz files Supreme Court appeal in Nazi salute case; Robert Norse maintains offer to drop case in exchange for loosened rules”: The Santa Cruz Sentinel has this news update.

“You can be fired for using medical marijuana, justices rule; Employers in Washington state are allowed to fire employees who fail a drug test, even if they have valid medical-marijuana authorization, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday”: The Seattle Times has this news update.

And The Associated Press has an article headlined “WA court: Workers can be fired over medical pot.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Washington State consists of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

“Court reinstates New Times lawsuit over late-night arrests”: The Arizona Republic has a news update that begins, “The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday reinstated portions of a federal lawsuit filed by the owners of Phoenix New Times stemming from their late-night arrests by Maricopa County sheriff’s deputies in 2007 after the paper published details of overreaching subpoenas sent to the editors.”

You can access today’s ruling of a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Scalia takes on Congress, a favorite target”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

In commentary available online from Slate: Dahlia Lithwick has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Shooting Pains: Florida’s crazy new law preventing doctors from asking patients about their guns.”

And David Weigel has an essay entitled “Confirmed: The Nomination Process Is Broken — Even Senate Republicans want to help speed up the presidential appointment process” that begins, “Dawn Johnsen doesn’t want to complain. It’s been one year and two months since she withdrew her nomination to lead the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.”

“Federal judge apologizes for misconduct”: This article appears today in The Tulsa World.

“Louisiana nominees for federal bench cruise through Senate hearing”: Bruce Alpert has this article today in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.

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

1. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in DePierre v. United States, No. 09-1533. Justice Antonin Scalia issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership, No.10-290. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a concurring opinion, in which Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. The Chief Justice did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., No. 10-313. Justice Scalia issued a concurring opinion. Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court in Sykes v. United States, No. 09-11311. Justice Thomas issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Scalia issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Kagan issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court says Microsoft must pay in patent case“; “Court: Using car to flee can be considered violent“; “Court says telephone companies must give access“; and “Supreme Court upholds cocaine sentence.”

“Judges Weigh Limits of Health Law’s Powers”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that “Judges Offer Mixed View on Health Law.”

The Washington Times contains an article headlined “Judges seem receptive to health care challenge; See lack of precedent for individual mandate.”

The Omaha World-Herald reports that “Health law hearing pleases Bruning.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Appeals court judges skeptical of government’s health care case.”

At ABCNews.com, Ariane de Vogue has an article headlined “Health Care Law: Appeals Court Seems Skeptical of Obama Administration’s Argument.”

And Politico.com reports that “Panel ponders striking individual mandate.”

“Judge Paul Hawkes files motion to dismiss ‘Taj Mahal’ charges”: Today’s edition of The St. Petersburg Times contains an article that begins, “Judge Paul M. Hawkes says all of his fellow judges at the 1st District Court of Appeal participated in key decisions leading to construction of a posh $50 million courthouse many have dubbed the Taj Mahal. In a motion Wednesday that seeks to dismiss charges against him for conduct unbecoming a judge, Hawkes says the court and its building committee worked in concert to make almost all decisions about the granite- and mahogany-filled building.”

You can access the motion to dismiss at this link, and you can access all of the documents filed in this Judicial Qualification Commission proceeding via this link.

“Court: Dad can paste daughter’s face on porn photo.” Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Court of Appeal for the Sixth Appellate District at this link.

“Pennsylvania Supreme Court urged to consider how Philadelphia pays death-penalty lawyers”: The Philadelphia Inquirer contains this article today.

“Sides argue CU regents’ authority in concealed-carry gun ban”: This article appears today in The Denver Post.

The Boulder Daily Camera reports today that “Colorado Supreme Court weighs challenge to CU campus gun ban.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Colo Supreme Court hears arguments on whether universities have right to ban concealed weapons.”

You can access the audio of yesterday’s oral argument in the Supreme Court of Colorado via this link (7.5MB Windows Media audio file).

“Ken Oswalt: Ruling on statutory rape may be hurdle.” Today’s edition of The Newark (Ohio) Advocate contains an article that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled sexual activity between two children younger than 13 without force or impairment cannot be defined as rape.”

Today’s edition of The Columbus Dispatch contains an article headlined “Justices: Kids’ sex was not a crime; Intercourse between boys ages 11 and 12 was consensual.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that “Ohio Supreme Court says statutory rape law unconstitutional when alleged victim and offender are under the age of 13.”

And The Dayton Daily News reports that “Ohio’s statutory rape law declared unconstitutional in some cases.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link. In addition, that court’s Public Information Office issued a news release headlined “‘Statutory Rape’ Law Unconstitutional When Applied to Sexual Conduct Between Two Children Under Age 13; When Use of Force, Impairment of Either Child Not Involved.”

“Juror is first to pass judgment on 2 courthouses; She inaugurated old, new buildings”: This article appears today in The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch.

“Diversity Increases Among High Court Practitioners”: Tony Mauro has this article in this week’s issue of The National Law Journal.

“Citizens United’s Outrageous Offspring”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.