“Va. Tech Victims’ Families Weigh Suits Against State; State’s Immunity May Be Subjected To Challenge”: This article will appear Thursday in The New York Times.

“Despite DNA Test, Prosecutor Is Retrying Case”: Thursday’s edition of The New York Times will contain this article.

“Derailing Southwick may take filibuster”: This article appears today in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi.

“[W]e conclude that the government’s evidence concerning Mr. Schaefer’s use of the Internet, standing alone, was not sufficient to establish that the child-pornography images at issue moved across state lines.” So holds a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in a ruling issued today. According to the decision, “we decline to assume that Internet use automatically equates with a movement across state lines.” The ruling is a victory for Denver-based Assistant Federal Public Defender Howard A. Pincus, lead counsel for the defendant-appellant on appeal. Pincus and I worked as co-clerks many years ago for the same judge on the Third Circuit.

“Book says Souter mulled resignation after Bush v. Gore”: So states this post at the “Yeas & Nays” blog at Examiner.com, previewing Jeffrey Toobin’s forthcoming book, “The Nine.”

And The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader today contains an article headlined “Did Souter cry over 2000 recount vote?”

The Associated Press is reporting: An article headlined “Judge Scolds U.S. on Wiretapping Records” reports on a decision that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued today in the case captioned Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Justice.

And in other news, “Some Lawmakers Wary of Surveillance Law.”

“Judge rules for Fieger; Federal edict strikes down state court rules used to discipline lawyer”: The Detroit News today contains an article that begins, “Embattled Southfield attorney Geoffrey Fieger scored a victory Tuesday when a federal judge in Detroit declared unconstitutional Michigan court rules that were used to discipline him.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Judge Sides With Ex-Kevorkian Lawyer.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at this link.

“Noriega Lawyers Ask to Block Extradition”: The Associated Press provides this report.

By a vote of 2-1, three-judge Ninth Circuit panel holds that the City of Chandler, Arizona did not violate police officer’s First Amendment rights by terminating him for “participating in (performing in, recording and purveying) a sexually explicit website with his wife”: You can access today’s Ninth Circuit ruling at this link.

The majority opinion’s “Discussion” section begins, “The major issue before us is whether Ronald Dible’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech was violated when he was terminated for maintaining and participating in a sexually explicit website with his wife, Megan Dible. In fact, for all practical purposes, the other issues in this case hinge on the decision of that issue. We will, therefore, consider it first and consider the other issues raised by the Dibles thereafter.”

Senior Circuit Judge William C. Canby, Jr. dissented from the majority’s unwillingness to hold that the officer’s firing violated the First Amendment. Judge Canby writes in his separate opinion: “Now, I recognize that pornography, although apparently popular, is not a very respected subject of First Amendment protection in many quarters. The majority opinion here reflects that distaste, variously characterizing Dible’s expressive activities as ‘vulgar,’ ‘indecent,’ ‘sleazy,’ and ‘disreputable.’ But vigorous enforcement of the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment often requires that we protect speech that many, even a majority, find offensive. Pornography, and sexual expression in general, is protected by the First Amendment when it does not constitute obscenity (and there is no showing that Dible’s expression meets that extreme standard). We should accept that fact and accord Dible’s expression the constitutional protection to which it is entitled.”

“Beatty takes his place in history on Supreme Court; Will take oath as second black state high court justice since Reconstruction”: The Spartanburg (S.C.) Herald-Journal today contains an article that begins, “Spartanburg’s Don Beatty will be sworn in as a South Carolina Supreme Court justice this afternoon, taking his place in history as the second black man to sit on that bench since Reconstruction.”

The remainder of the alphabet was sadly unavailable for litigation: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its ruling today in the case captioned ABC v. DEF. The opinion explains how the case came to have that unusual caption. Demonstrating that being toward the start of the alphabet isn’t all bad, ABC has achieved a partial victory in today’s ruling.

“May a municipal jail, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, withhold a portion of an inmate’s canteen-account funds in order to cover the costs of booking, room and board without providing the inmate with a hearing before it withholds the money?” So begins an opinion that Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The court’s answer to that question is “yes.”

“Microsoft Patent Win in Court May Cut Its Chances in Congress”: Bloomberg News provides a report that begins, “Microsoft Corp.’s success in reversing a $1.52 billion trial loss was the latest in a series of court victories that may undermine its chance for broad changes in U.S. patent law this year.”

“Muslim sues O.C. over right to wear head scarf; Deputies asked the woman to remove her head covering while in custody in O.C.” The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “A Muslim whose religious practice requires that she cover her head in public sued the Orange County Sheriff’s Department on Tuesday, alleging her rights were violated when jail officials forced her to remove a head scarf while locked up for about eight hours.”

And The Orange County Register reports today that “Muslim woman sues sheriff; Woman says religious rights were violated when deputies forced her to remove her head scarf.”

“D.C. Case Could Shape Gun Laws; Supreme Court Is Asked to Uphold Ban”: Robert Barnes and David Nakamura have this front page article today in The Washington Post, which also contains an editorial entitled “The District Appeals: The city defends its gun law — and opens the door to a definitive reading of the Second Amendment.”

And The Washington Times reports today that “City asks high court to uphold gun ban.”

“Murder case turns on 41-year diagnosis: Did a 1966 shot cause an officer’s death? A medical fight looms.” The Philadelphia Inquirer contains this article today.

“New Book Details Cheney Lawyer’s Efforts to Expand Executive Power”: This front page article appears today in The Washington Post.

“Broadcom wins antitrust appeal against Qualcomm”: Reuters provides this report.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Third Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Hawaii Ferry Sits Idle Amid Protests and Court Rulings”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Honolulu Advertiser reports today that “Kauai court asked to bar Hawaii Superferry.”

And The Honolulu Star-Bulletin reports that “Superferry saga moves to courts; Legal action taken by Kauai and Maui groups will be heard tomorrow.”

“Court upholds CIA’s power to keep president’s daily briefing secret”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

Today in The Oakland Tribune, Josh Richman reports that “Court lets old CIA briefs stay secret; Vietnam-era intelligence can sidestep Freedom of Information Act.”

In The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein reports that “Presidential Briefings May Be Kept Secret.”

And Reuters reports that “Even 40 years later CIA briefings to stay secret.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Ninth Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Appeals Court Dismisses Elevator Antitrust Suit”: This article appears today in The New York Sun.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Second Circuit ruling can be found at this link.