“Two Views of a Radio Host on Trial Over Threats to Judges”: This article will appear Thursday in The New York Times.

And law.com reports that “Trial of Blogger Accused of Threatening 7th Circuit Judges Opens; Prosecutor tells jury that defendant took credit for encouraging the 2005 murders of relatives of a federal judge.”

“Homeowner Rights and Hot Dog Sellers Are Talk of Court”: Adam Liptak will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

Thursday in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Fla. beach-widening case could have even wider implications; Landowners’ request for compensation heard by Supreme Court.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Justices appear sympathetic to beachfront property owners; Florida residents argue that the state can’t take away their right to private beaches after it restored an eroded coastline; A majority of the Supreme Court indicates it agrees with them.”

Lesley Clark of The Miami Herald reports that “Supreme Court case could affect beach restoration efforts.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court hears arguments in Florida beach property case; Florida took up a seven-mile-long beach restoration project, and some beach property owners say it violates their rights; On Wednesday, a lawyer for waterfront landowners encountered both skepticism and support at the Supreme Court.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “High Court Weighs Florida Beach Case.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has this post about the oral argument.

You can access the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, No. 08-1151, at this link.

“Former Solicitor General Feels the Wrath of Senators”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post that begins, “Democratic senators have for months accused the U.S. Supreme Court of stifling civil lawsuits. They’ve cited, most recently, the Court’s 5-4 decision this year in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which added a new plausibility requirement for lawsuits. Today, in sometimes tense exchanges, those senators went head-to-head with Gregory Garre, the former solicitor general who argued and won the case almost exactly a year ago.”

“Parnell picks Stowers for Supreme Court”: The Anchorage Daily News has this update.

“Spring Break, Scalia-Style: The best Supreme Court case ever about partying on the beach.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Beachfront property dispute at Supreme Court”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“R.I. judge’s nomination rolls smoothly through Senate hearing”: Today’s edition of The Providence Journal contains an article that begins, “She came from modest beginnings in the segregated South, and Tuesday Superior Court Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson came a step closer to making history as the first African-American woman to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.”

“DOJ Pays $4M a Year to Read Public Court Documents”: At Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, Ryan Singel has a post that begins, “The federal court system charged the Department of Justice more than $4 million in 2009 for access to its electronic court filing system, which is composed entirely of documents in the public domain.”

Perhaps the U.S. Department of Justice will air this grievance when it completes the PACER Online Satisfaction Survey.

“Jurors defend verdict that led to Texas execution”: The Associated Press has a lengthy report that begins, “David Martin is sickened by the suggestion that Texas executed an innocent man when Cameron Todd Willingham was put to death for setting a fire that killed his three children. The veteran defense attorney represented Willingham at trial. He looked at all the evidence. And he has no doubt that his client deserved to die.”

“Man behind bid to ban divorce says he’s playing it straight”: Today’s edition of The Sacramento Bee contains an article that begins, “‘Till death do us part’ is no idle promise to John Marcotte, a Sacramentan bent on banning divorce in California.”

“Case concerns student loans, bankruptcy”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

“Supreme Court to hear Florida beach property rights dispute; Homeowners with private beachfronts on the Gulf Coast have sued over a government program that added sand to eroded beaches and made the new strip of land public property”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Supreme Court case: Florida v. beach property owners; Beach property owners in Florida went to court after the state government added sand to the beach in front of their homes, citing erosion, and designated the new stretch public land; The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday.”

Yesterday’s edition of The Orlando Sentinel reported that “Beach replenishment trampled our rights, property owners claim; Supreme Court hears Panhandle case — should they be compensated?”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “Court To Decide: Who Owns A Preserved Beach?” featuring Nina Totenberg.

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Beachfront property dispute at Supreme Court.”

The Destin Log has a report headlined “Beach restoration in the balance: Supreme Court justices wade into local quagmire.”

The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial entitled “Property Rights at the Water’s Edge: The Supreme Court gets a seaside view of the Fifth Amendment.”

And The St. Petersburg Times contains an editorial entitled “Florida should win battle over beaches.”

“Supreme Court hears case on lawyers’ free-speech rights; Firm challenges ban on certain advice to bankruptcy clients”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.