“Top court to rule on swing clubs”: Broadcast News of Canada provides this report.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denies rehearing en banc of decision holding that two subpoenaed reporters can be compelled to give grand jury testimony: Today’s order, accompanied by an opinion concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc, can be accessed here.

In early press coverage, Reuters reports that “Appeals Court Refuses to Rehear CIA Leak Case.”

“Drug Makers Prepare to Argue Against a Patent”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Wall Street Journal reports that “Court looks at role of patents in research; Drugmakers, including Lilly, are keeping a close watch on long-running case.”

And The Economist offers a related article headlined “Seeking a cure for legal headaches.”

“High court to hear Md. ‘Miranda’ case; Teen implicated self in Annapolis murder”: The Baltimore Sun contains this article today.

And The Capital of Annapolis, Maryland reports that “High court takes city murder case.”

“San Pablo man’s murder case, racially tinged, goes to justices”: This article appears today in The Contra Costa Times.

And today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Court signals strict juror-exclusion view.”

In newz from New Zealand: The New Zealand Herald today contains an article headlined “‘Extraordinary’ challenge to Pitcairn rape verdicts.”

The Dominion Post reports today that “Pitcairners plead rape law ignorance.”

And The Herald Sun contains an article headlined “We didn’t know rape was illegal: Pitcairners.”

“Delta liable for drunken driver?” Bill Rankin has this article today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Also ten years ago today: The U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Celotex Corp. v. Edwards, a case in which I was the principal author of the merits briefs for petitioner.

“Psst…Justice Scalia…You Know, You’re an Activist Judge, Too”: That’s the title of Adam Cohen’s “Editorial Observer” essay today in The New York Times.

Today’s lone U.S. Supreme Court opinion in an argued case: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston reports that the Court only decision today came in the case of Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo, No. 03-932. Justice Stephen G. Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court, reversing a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Breyer’s opinion for the Court here; and the oral argument transcript here.

In early press coverage, Hope Yen of The Associated Press reports that “High Court Keeps Securities Fraud Standard.” And Reuters reports that “Court Makes Securities Fraud Suits Harder.”

“What Liberals Want: A progressive conference on the Constitution sheds light on the real stakes involved with the judiciary.” John Hinderaker has this essay today online at The Weekly Standard.

“A Disappointing Double Standard: Tribe’s rebuke amounts to little more than a slap on the wrist.” This editorial appears today in The Harvard Crimson.

“‘War on Judges’ or War on the Right: Newsweek isn’t concerned about criticism of the judiciary, just conservative criticism of the judiciary.” Andrew C. McCarthy has this essay today at National Review Online.

“The Supreme Court’s New Age Discrimination Ruling: Good News and Bad News for Both Employers and Older Workers.” FindLaw columnist Joanna Grossman has this essay today.

“Closing down the Senate won’t help the Democrats; Threat would replay a Republican’s folly”: The Boston Globe contains this news analysis today.

The Rocky Mountain News reports today that “Focus faction attacks Salazar; Springs group pushes for Bush court picks.”

Newsday today contains an editorial entitled “GOPers already pervade courts; Right-wingers protest too much.”

The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky contains an editorial entitled “Frist’s bad faith.”

The Day of New London, Connecticut contains an editorial entitled “Sen. Frist Goes Too Far; Presidential candidacy won’t allow him to take narrow ideological views.”

The Boulder Daily Camera contains an editorial entitled “Flaming rhetoric: Judiciary bashing about ‘energizing the base.’”

The Free Lance-Star of Fredericksburg, Virginia contains an editorial entitled “A nuke, not a T-bolt; Sen. John Warner shouldn’t flinch from ‘the nuclear option.’”

The Palm Beach Post contains an editorial entitled “Place no faith in Frist as a responsible leader.”

In The Chicago Sun-Times, columnist Jesse Jackson has an essay entitled “GOP grandstanding on judges.”

In The New York Post, John Podhoretz has an essay entitled “Dems’ Suicide Plot.”

Tom Teepen of Cox News Service has an essay entitled “An old trick the Senate might try: compromise.”

In The Naples Daily News, Dan K. Thomasson has an essay entitled “Incendiary mix: religion and politics.”

And in The Washington Post, Richard Cohen has an op-ed entitled “Faith-Based Pandering.”

“Inside Bush’s Supreme Team: In the fight for the courts, three behind-the-scenes players are uniting the Right.” This article appears in the April 25, 2005 issue of BusinessWeek.

“Court revives suit against Vatican Bank; Claim alleges church held money looted by Croatian Nazis”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, reports today that “9th Circuit allows partial suit against Vatican Bank.”

David Kravets of The Associated Press reports that “Holocaust Case Against Vatican Bank Revived.”

And Reuters reports that “U.S. Appeals Court Reinstates Vatican Holocaust Suit.”

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has articles headlined “High Court Agrees to Sit Down to Religious Tea Case“; “Supreme Court Agrees to Consider When Police May Search Home; Case involves Georgia attorney charged with cocaine possession“; and “Blackmun Clerks Had Too Much Power, Says Historian.”

Jeff Chorney reports that “9th Circuit OKs Suit Against Vatican Over Holocaust; Claims could exceed $100 million, say lawyers.”

An article is headlined “Fire Fight: The Art of the Asbestos Deal; New Senate legislation placates conservative Republicans, grabs key Democrat.”

Jonathan Ringel reports that “Rudolph Defenders Read Feds’ Signals to Make Plea Deal; DOJ’s surprise suggestion led to explosives disclosure.”

And in other news, “Judge Rules Public Entities Too Slow in Microsoft Case.”

“Moussaoui Tries to Plead Guilty Again; The Sept. 11 suspect writes to a judge that he will accept the death penalty; His lawyers say it is a naive bid to get a Supreme Court hearing”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“No probe of Schiavo memo”: The Hill today contains an article that begins, “The Senate Rules Committee has decided not to take any action dealing with a leaked Republican memo that cast the congressional effort to pass legislation dealing with Terri Schiavo in political terms.”

“Mass. abortion clinic law allowed to stand; US Supreme Court declines an appeal”: This article appears today in The Boston Globe.

The Boston Herald today reports that “High court won’t touch Mass. law on abortion buffers.”

And The Washington Times reports that “Court won’t rule on clinic buffer zones.”

“Justices Weigh State’s Jury Selection Law; A lawyer argues before the U.S. Supreme Court that California allows prosecutors to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.