“For Alito, a Tricky Question of Statements vs. Thoughts; High Court Nominee Will Be Challenged to Reconcile His Abortion Rights Memos With Judicial Stance”: Charles Lane will have this news analysis Sunday in The Washington Post.

In news from Connecticut: The New York Times reports today that “Bomb Threats Force Closing of Courts in Connecticut.”

The Hartford Courant reports today that “Courts Shut Down; 45 Buildings Evacuated After Bomb Threats.”

The New Haven Register reports that “Menacing call to governor’s office prompts closings.”

The Yale Daily News reports that “New Haven courthouse evacuated after bomb threat.”

The Bridgeport Post reports that “Bomb threats evacuate courthouses across state.”

The New Britain Herald contains an article headlined “Courthouse bomb scare.”

The Waterbury Republican-American reports that “Courts across state closed for day, but no explosives found.”

The Manchester Journal Inquirer reports that “No bomb found in courthouses.”

The Bristol Press reports that “Bomb scare shuts down state courts.”

The Danbury News-Times contains an article headlined “Courthouse bomb threats: Connecticut evacuates ‘judicial buildings,’ including Danbury, after threatening calls.”

The Middletown Press reports that “City officials learn of threat on TV.”

The Norwich Bulletin reports that “Danielson court, Norwich City Hall will reopen Monday after bomb threat clears state buildings.”

And The Torrington Register Citizen reports that “Court day ends early in Litchfield and Bantam.”

At “Crime & Federalism,” Connecticut lawyer Norm Pattis describes his experience in a post titled “Saved By A Bomb Threat.”

“ACLU Defends Bus Rider Who Refused to Show ID”: This segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered.”

In related news, the case of Gilmore v. Gonzales will be argued this upcoming Thursday before a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel consisting of Senior Circuit Judges Stephen Trott and Thomas G. Nelson and Circuit Judge Richard A. Paez. Ironically, the Ninth Circuit’s oral argument calendar on which the case is listed repeatedly advises that “Picture ID required to enter Courthouse.” Perhaps Gilmore’s attempt to attend the oral argument of his appeal will give rise to a new lawsuit.

One year ago today: On December 3, 2004, as I first noted here that day, The Baltimore Sun published an article headlined “U.S. concludes Luna’s death still a puzzle; A year later, leads sought in case of U.S. prosecutor; Neither murder, suicide ruled out; Reconstruction of travels has perplexing 2-hour gap.”

“Spin Paper: The Washington Post acts as a mouthpiece of the Left’s attack on Alito.” Edward Whelan has this essay today at National Review Online.

“Judge Clears Way for City to Sue Gun Companies”: The New York Times contains this article today.

“Court favors doctors in lesbian’s suit; 3-judge panel allows use of religious beliefs in denying insemination”: This article appears today in The San Diego Union-Tribune.

And The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Refusal to Treat Lesbian Upheld; Doctors say they denied insemination because woman was single, not because she was gay.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District, Division One, at this link.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Alito Critics Cite Inconsistencies” and “Appellate panel dismisses parents suit over survey.”

“Judge zaps state law on video games”: The Chicago Tribune today contains an article that begins, “Dealing a defeat to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a federal judge on Friday struck down a state law that would ban the sale of violent and sexually explicit video games to minors.”

The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that “Ban on video games shot down.”

The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois reports that “Video game restrictions blocked; Judge throws out law curbing sales, rentals to youths.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Ill. Governor to Appeal Video Game Ruling.”

“Bye Bye BlackBerry?” This article appears today in The New York Times.

In Sunday’s edition of The New York Times: Jonathan D. Glater will have an article headlined “Are Lawyers Being Overbilled for Their Test Preparation?”

And in other news, “Report Finds Cover-Up in an F.B.I. Terror Case.”

“Nominee Says His Views on Abortion Would Not Affect His Decisions”: This article appears today in The New York Times, which also contains an editorial entitled “Judge Alito and Abortion.”

The Chicago Tribune today contains an article headlined “Alito says views on abortion no factor; Nominee: The roles of advocate, judge differ.”

The Boston Globe contains articles headlined “Alito says abortion ruling ’embedded’; Nominee explains memo to Specter” and “A formidable questioner, Specter holds fate of nominee; Independent streak has both sides on edge.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Alito seeks to ease worry over his personal views on abortion; Assures Specter any personal belief would play no role in deliberating constitutional issues.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer contains articles headlined “Alito downplays personal views; With criticism of the nominee rising, Specter met with him, at White House’s suggestion” and “On prisoner rights, a telling dissent; While protective of free speech, he backed prison officials in an inmate’s suit for reading material.”

The Newark Star-Ledger reports that “Alito downplays abortion dilemma; Judge tells Senate chairman he’ll be impartial.”

The Washington Times reports that “Nominee separates judicial, personal.”

And in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “’84 Alito Memo Backed Police Who Shot Unarmed Suspect; The Supreme Court nominee wrote that killing the teen could be ‘justified as reasonable’; It reinforces his image as pro-law enforcement.”

“Ill. Sens Want Security Systems for Judges”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Illinois Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin and Barack Obama asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Friday to speed up the distribution of $12 million for security systems for judges, saying they aren’t getting help fast enough.”