Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor is a guest on tonight’s broadcast of the CBS program “Late Show with David Letterman“: You can watch some of Justice O’Connor’s segment by clicking here. In that clip, Justice O’Connor explains how she learned to avoid the Justice Byron White vise-grip handshake.

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Sotomayor, Word by Word; Supreme Court nominee’s dense writing style works through every detail.”

And in other news, “Restaurateurs Seek Supreme Court Review of San Francisco Health Insurance Mandate.”

“Prescription drug fight goes before appeals court”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “So-called data-mining companies that collect information about the drugs doctors prescribe asked an appeals court Tuesday to stop Vermont from enacting a law next week restricting their work.”

“Court Favors Parents in Battle Over Special-Education Tuition”: Robert Barnes and Nelson Hernandez have this article today in The Washington Post.

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has an article headlined “Supreme Court victory for parents of disabled students; Justices rule that parents who remove a disabled child from public school can be reimbursed for private instruction; The court says a ‘free, appropriate’ education is a public duty.”

The New York Times reports that “Court Affirms Reimbursement for Special Education.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that “Court Rules on Funding Special Ed.”

The Oregonian reports that “U.S. Supreme Court rules against Forest Grove School District in case involving ex-student with special needs.”

The Hillsboro (Ore.) Argus reports that “Supreme Court rules against Forest Grove School District By a 6-3 vote, court finds district must reimburse a private special education.”

Lastly, from National Public Radio, today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Rules On Special Education Case.” And yesterday’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Justices Rule For Parents Of Special Ed Student.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Daughter Against Use of Father’s Name to Subvert Neo-Nazis”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an article that begins, “The daughter of a distinguished Jewish theologian said Monday that she opposed a plan to rename for him a stretch of Missouri highway that has been adopted by a group of neo-Nazis.”

“Conservatives Have ‘Originalism’; Liberals Have … ?” This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

“City lawyer’s suit on torture memos gains momentum”: Yesterday’s edition of The New Haven Register contained an article that begins, “Last year, when lawyer Jonathan Freiman sued Bush administration officials over their policies on torture, there was a wave of criticism that he and the human rights clinic at the Yale Law School were out of line.”

In the July 2009 issue of ABA Journal magazine: David G. Savage will have an article headlined “Narrowing the Courthouse Door: High court makes it tougher to get past the pleading stage.”

And John Gibeaut will have an article headlined “The ‘Roach Motel’: As the DOJ’s disciplinary agency all but disappears, judges take matters into their own hands.”

“This suit has passed its sixth anniversary and should not be allowed to grow a beard.” So writes Seventh Circuit Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook in the second to last paragraph of this opinion issued today. The second sentence of that same paragraph demonstrates that Judge Easterbrook does not forgo using “forego” to mean “to do without.”

Update: A post from February 2007 at “the (new) legal writer” is titled “Don’t forego forgo Garner’s Usage Tip of the Day.”

“Okla bomber seeks lawyer for suit over prison food”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols is asking for a court-appointed lawyer to help him with a lawsuit complaining about the food he gets in prison.”

“Senate GOP: Will Sotomayor uphold Constitution?” The Associated Press has this report.

Today in The Boston Globe, Peter S. Canellos has an essay entitled “Obama’s unintended fusion in Sotomayor selection.”

Yesterday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Tell Me More” contained an audio segment entitled “Can Jeff Sessions Fairly Evaluate Sonia Sotomayor?” (RealPlayer required).

In this week’s issue of The National Law Journal, law professor Douglas W. Kmiec has an op-ed entitled “The ‘Latina woman’ comment: The rule of law depends upon the commitment to — even empathy for — giving meaning to equality in more than name alone.”

At “The Ninth Justice” blog of National Journal, Stuart Taylor Jr. has a lengthy post titled “The Case For — And Against — Double Standards.”

And at his “Think Again” blog hosted by The New York Times, law professor Stanley Fish has a post titled “What Kind of Judges Do We Want?”

Happy birthday to Justice Clarence Thomas! According to the popular “Today in History” feature from The Associated Press, Justice Thomas celebrates his 61st birthday today.

And 40 years ago today, “Warren E. Burger was sworn in as chief justice of the United States by the man he was succeeding, Earl Warren.”

Available online from National Public Radio: Today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court Rules Narrowly In Voting Rights Case” featuring Nina Totenberg. Meanwhile, late on yesterday’s broadcast of “Morning Edition,” Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “High Court Leaves Voting Rights Act Intact.”

Yesterday’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court Rules In Voting Rights Case” also featuring Totenberg.

And yesterday’s broadcast of “Talk of the Nation” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Rules On Voting Rights Act” featuring, among others, David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times.

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Gay couple’s weapon in lawsuit: Obama’s words.” Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “When Orange County newlyweds Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer face off against the Obama administration over a law that denies federal benefits and interstate recognition for their marriage, they will have some potent ammunition: President Obama’s own words.”

“Justices Retain Oversight by U.S. on Voting”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Ruling Prompts a Mixed Response” and an editorial entitled “The Voting Rights Act Survives.”

Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Voting Rights Act Upheld, But Court Hints at Change.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Voting Rights Victory: The Supreme Court wisely refuses to usurp Congress’s judgment.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court narrows but preserves Voting Rights Act; The justices leave Section 5 safeguards intact while allowing municipalities with a clean record to ‘bail out’; Clarence Thomas dissents, saying he would strike down the provision.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “A victory for the Voting Rights Act: The Supreme Court’s decision to preserve a key provision of the 1965 legislation is a welcome outcome.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Narrow ruling leaves intact voter rights law.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “No, discrimination at polls isn’t just ancient history: Supreme Court’s doubts about Voting Rights Act raise concern.”

In The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that “Supreme Court Avoids Voting-Rights Act Fight.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has articles headlined “Supreme Court: More districts can sue to bail out of Voting Rights Act; The court did not strike down the law Monday, as some experts had expected, but it opened the door for jurisdictions to free themselves from one of the act’s key provisions” and “Supreme Court strikes a compromise to save landmark voting law; Civil rights activists praise the court for not throwing out a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court eases Voting Rights Act regulations.”

In The Austin American-Statesman, Chuck Lindell reports that “Supreme Court lets Voting Rights Act stand in Austin case; Decision lets more governments opt out of federal election oversight.”

In The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Bill Rankin and Aaron Gould Sheinin report that “Supreme Court issues narrow Voting Rights Act ruling; Counties and towns can ask to be exempt.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “Voting Rights Act left intact.”

law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “High Court’s Narrow Ruling on Voting Rights Act Evokes Surprise.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Compromise Prevails in U.S. Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling.”

“Cheetah Lounge challenges law on underage exotic dancers”: Today’s edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution contains an article that begins, “The Georgia Supreme Court has to decide whether Atlanta city officials are trampling on the rights of exotic dancers by demanding they be age 21 to perform in alcohol-selling clubs or protecting them from the evils of underage drinking.”

“Court allows gold mine to dump waste in lake; Despite ruling, detractors say fight is far from over”: The Anchorage Daily News contains this article today.

In The Los Angeles Times, Jim Tankersley and David G. Savage report that “Justices OK dumping mine waste into Alaskan lake; The Supreme Court approves the draining of gold mine debris into a small lake; The Bush administration had labeled it ‘fill’ rather than pollution to make the dumping comply with the Clean Water Act.”

And The New York Times reports today that “Justices Say Waste Can Be Dumped in Lake.”

“Justice’s car plows into store; Pickering apologized to the store owner, wasn’t cited in incident”: This article appears today in The Las Vegas Review-Journal.

And The Las Vegas Sun reports that “Stuck accelerator sends Supreme Court justice’s car into store; No one injured after Pickering’s Mercedes slams into UPS business.”

“Nominee for Alito’s 3rd Circuit Seat Appears to Be a Centrist at Heart”: law.com’s Henry Gottlieb has an article that begins, “Don’t look for a 180-degree swing between Samuel Alito Jr. and Joseph Greenaway Jr., President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill Alito’s seat on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”

“Supreme Court ruling involving disqualification of judges prompts review; Disqualification of judges to be studied”: Today’s edition of The Las Vegas Review-Journal contains an article that begins, “The Nevada Supreme Court ordered a commission looking at judicial reform to re-examine when a judge should be disqualified from a case after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the issue earlier this month. The court gave the commission until July 20 to deliver a report on disqualifications.”