“Court upholds settlement in asbestos lawsuits”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to let an insurance company settle some asbestos lawsuits for about $500 million in exchange for blocking any future litigation resulting from its long relationship with Johns Manville Corp., once the world’s largest producer of asbestos.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Travelers wins asbestos case at U.S. Supreme Court.”

And Reuters reports that “US court rules for Travelers in asbestos case.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Bailey, No. 08-295, at this link.

“Supreme Court makes age bias suits harder to win; Justices, overturning a jury award won by a 54-year-old who was demoted, say workers bear the full burden of proof”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court sets high bar for age-bias suits; Older workers bear the burden of proof to show age was key reason they were fired or demoted.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court makes it harder to prove age discrimination.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Worker Age-Bias Suits Limited by U.S. Supreme Court.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., No. 08-441, at this link.

“Supreme Court: Prisoners Have No Right to DNA Evidence.” Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court rules DNA tests for prisoners not a constitutional right; By a 5-4 vote, the justices say current protections are enough for convicts who believe old genetic evidence will exonerate them.”

In Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Jennifer S. Forsyth will have an article headlined “Court Upholds States in DNA Testing of Convicts.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has articles headlined “Convicts have no constitutional right of access to DNA evidence, Supreme Court says; In a 5-4 decision involving a rape case in Alaska, the court leaves the issue to states” and “What impact will Supreme Court decision on DNA evidence have? The defendant’s advocates decried the court’s ruling against a convict’s right to such evidence, but Attorney General Eric Holder suggested it would have a limited effect.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court says convicts lack right to DNA testing.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court rejects right for criminals to DNA tests.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has posts titled “Court rejects DNA access claim” and “Handing off the DNA issue.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in District Attorney’s Office for Third Judicial Dist. v. Osborne, No. 08-6, at this link.

“High court rules in favor of ex-Enron executive”: The Houston Chronicle has a news update that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that former Enron broadband executive Scott Yeager cannot be retried on some charges because a jury in 2005 acquitted him of others related to the same alleged scheme.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this article reporting on the ruling.

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “US court rules for ex-Enron Broadband executive.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Enron Official Wins Round in Bid to Avoid Retrial.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Yeager v. United States, No. 08-67, at this link.

“PA court: Philly gun laws invalid.” The Philadelphia Inquirer has a news update that begins, “Two key provisions of Philadelphia’s most recent attempt to impose local gun controls – banning ‘straw purchase’ of handguns and banning assault weapons – were invalidated today by a state appeals court.”

And The Associated Press reports that “State court again strikes down Philly gun laws.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

Programming note: Weather permitting, my son and I are planning to spend this afternoon watching the Philadelphia Phillies host the Toronto Blue Jays at Citizens Bank Park.

Because we are taking public transportation to the game, and because we are planning to make a stop for lunch in South Philly on the way to the game, we’ll be heading out the door around the time that the U.S. Supreme Court will be announcing today’s rulings in argued cases.

“SCOTUSblog” will provide complete coverage of those rulings, and you can access the rulings via this link at the Court’s web site shortly after 10 a.m. eastern time today.

“San Diego lawyer and A’s settle class-action sex discrimination lawsuit”: The Oakland Tribune today contains an article that begins, “A San Diego lawyer and the Oakland Athletics baseball organization have settled a class-action lawsuit over a Mother’s Day weekend giveaway of free plaid reversible bucket hats.”

“Appeals Court Backs Prison for E-Mail Obscenity”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

My most recent coverage of the case can be accessed here.

“Sotomayor avoids firm answers on key issues”: The Associated Press has this report.

Today’s edition of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina contains an article headlined “La Raza drawn into debate; Sotomayor is a former member.”

And online at Reason, Steve Chapman has an essay entitled “Is Sotomayor Anti-Gun? When it comes to the Second Amendment, Obama’s Supreme Court nominee practices judicial restraint, not judicial activism.”