“Analyzing the Decisions of the 2006-07 Supreme Court”: You can view video of yesterday’s Federalist Society event via this link, or directly by clicking on part one and part two.

“Nominee lobbies for court seat; Southwick seeks support among senators for bid”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article that begins, “With his nomination to a federal appeals court stalled by the opposition of key Democrats, Mississippi Judge Leslie Southwick is in Washington this week trying to save his candidacy.”

“High Court Reveals a Mind for Business; In a term marked by 5-4 rulings, no one proved to be a better friend to corporate America than Alito”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this report.

“High court spares mentally ill killer; The Supreme Court rules that a Texas death row inmate cannot be executed because his illness prevents him from understanding his fate”: Henry Weinstein has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports today that “Hayward native’s execution blocked; Supreme Court says mental illness wasn’t considered.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “Texas competency rules too narrow, high court decides; Justices change their course on the executions of mentally ill killers.”

The Austin American-Statesman reports that “High court blocks Texas death sentence; Slim majority clarifies rules for executing potentially insane inmates.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram contains an article headlined “Court: Inmate too mentally ill to be executed.” In addition, an editorial is entitled “Death and madness.”

And The Louisville Courier-Journal reports that “High court blocks execution in Texas; Ruling could affect Indiana man’s case.”

“Justices overturn ban on price-fixing; Some say the ruling could mean higher consumer prices and fewer discounts”: David G. Savage and Daniel Yi have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Conservative justice: Forget the promises — Roberts and Alito delivered high court ideology.” Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.

“A Court Divided: The Supremes move right on the question of race; Liberal justices dissented passionately; But there may still be some room in the middle.” Stuart Taylor Jr. has this essay online at Newsweek’s web site. In addition, Ellis Cose has an essay entitled “A Sliver of Hope: The Supreme Court is divided not merely over how to interpret the Constitution; It’s divided over the meaning of American history.”

And online at Time magazine’s web site, Reynolds Holding has an essay entitled “Can Schools Still Achieve Diversity?”

“How To Keep Brown Alive: Use income level, instead of race, to integrate the schools.” Richard Kahlenberg has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Analysts See Shift in Key Supreme Court Decisions”: This segment (transcript with link to audio) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.”

“Landmark Ruling: The Supreme Court’s ruling could be a step back in integration law.” Jan Crawford Greenburg had this video segment on last night’s broadcast of the ABC News program “Nightline.”

And along with Howard Rosenberg, Jan has a written report headlined “Two Women Come Together to Oppose Busing; Plaintiff Crystal Meredith and Civil Rights Activist Mattie Jones Say Program Failed Their Children.”

“DOJ Loses Brand”: Rachel Brand is departing from the U.S. Department of Justice, “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” reports here.

In news coverage from Seattle: In coverage of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District, No. 05-908, The Seattle Times today contains articles headlined “U.S. Supreme Court rejects Seattle’s racial criteria“; “Parents’ attorney relished chance to argue case at Supreme Court“; “Some new diversity strategies take shape“; and “Former schools superintendent watched case closely in D.C.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Supreme Court challenges Seattle schools.”

And The Seattle Post-Intelligencer today contains articles headlined “Schools seek new diversity answers after court rejects race as tiebreaker“; “Reaction within Supreme Court among sharpest“; and “Q&A: Woman who fought school district.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Seattle Schools: Court’s wrong turn.” And U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) has an op-ed entitled “Still seeking equality in schools.”

The Louisville Courier-Journal is reporting: In coverage of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Meredith v. Jefferson County Bd. of Ed., No. 05-915, today’s newspaper contains articles headlined “5-4 ruling limits use of race by district; Official: Decision doesn’t ‘shut the door’ on diversity“; “Woman kept ‘my promise’ to son“; “New school chief sees no return to segregation“; “Some find ‘sunshine’ amid rain“; “Businesses to keep eye on effect of ruling“; and “Catholic system sees no impact from ruling.”

In addition, the newspaper contains an editorial entitled “Thwarting equity.” Rebecca Owens has an op-ed entitled “‘Good things going’ in JCPS.” And Suzy Post has an op-ed entitled “Ruling is ‘a massive step backwards.’”

Available online from National Public Radio: Today’s broadcast of “Morning Edition” contained audio segments entitled “High Court’s New Race Ruling Echoes in Schools” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Schools in Supreme Court Case Heartened“; “Court’s School Race Decision Recalls Brown Case“; “High Court Changes Mind on Detainee Appeals“; and “Supreme Court Ends Ban on Price Minimums.”

Today’s broadcast of “Day to Day” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court to Review Guantanamo Cases” featuring Tom Goldstein.

And this evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “White House Loses Ground with High Court” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Officer Cited Issues with Guantanamo Tribunals“; and “Legal Experts Weigh In on Court Decisions” (featuring Jeffrey Rosen and Doug Kmiec).

“Supreme Court to Hear Detainee Appeals”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Lyle Denniston appeared on today’s broadcast of the public radio program “Here & Now.”

“Supreme Court Term Shows Shift to Right”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press provides this report.

“High Court to Hear Terror Detainee Case”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post provides this news update.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “High court to hear Guantanamo detainees case.”

Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court to review Gitmo detainee case.”

The New York Times provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court Will Hear Case on Detainees.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Court to hear Guantanamo prisoners appeals.”

And Greg Stohr and Laurie Asseo of Bloomberg News reports that “Guantanamo Bay Detainees Get U.S. High Court Hearing.”

“Supreme Court shifts to right with Bush appointees”: James Vicini of Reuters provides this news analysis.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Dems Denounce Court Desegregation Ruling“; “Appeals Court Unseals CIA Leak Documents“; and “Democrats Hope to Close Guantanamo.”

Ninth Circuit referees battle of Monster versus Freek: A trade dress dispute between energy drinks gives rise to today’s ruling, from which Freek emerges victorious. The ruling includes as an appendix these black and white images.

The state of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is “very good”: So reported Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul R. Michel in remarks delivered yesterday.

Did the Village of Glendale, Ohio violate the First Amendment when it adopted an ordinance forbidding the placement of for-sale signs on automobiles located on the public streets? By a vote of 8-7, the majority of the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit answers “perhaps.” The dissenters would answer “no.” You can access today’s ruling at this link.

The Institute for Justice, which represented the plaintiff challenging the ordinance, achieved victory before the en banc court by convincing two Republican appointees to join the Sixth Circuit’s Democratic appointees in ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The dissenters, meanwhile, were all appointed to the court by Republican presidents.

My coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling in this case — a 2-1 ruling in favor of Glendale where the dissenter was a federal district judge sitting by designation — can be accessed here.

“[A]s requested by Dow Jones, we will release those redacted portions of Judge Tatel’s concurring opinion and the two ex parte affidavits that discuss grand jury matters revealed either during the Libby trial or by grand jury witnesses themselves.” On February 15, 2005, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision upholding the adjudications of civil contempt against reporters Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper. Circuit Judge David S. Tatel‘s opinion concurring in the judgment, as originally published, reflected extensive redactions. Since then, the D.C. Circuit has made public some of the redacted portions of Judge Tatel’s opinion.

Now that the Lewis “Scooter” Libby trial has concluded, Dow Jones asked the D.C. Circuit to make public the rest of the redacted portions. In a per curiam decision issued today, the appellate court has agreed to make public more, but not all, of the redacted portions.

“Roberts Steered U.S. Supreme Court as It Trimmed Precedents”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News provides this report.

“Supreme Court to Review Guantanamo Cases”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court, reversing course, agreed Friday to review whether Guantanamo Bay detainees may go to federal court to challenge their indefinite confinement.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to rehear detainee cases.”

You can access today’s Order List at this link.

In other coverage of today’s orders, The AP reports that “Court Allows Student’s Anti-Bush T-Shirt.”