The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Pryor sworn in to federal appeals bench” and “Justice Brown leaving top court at month’s end.”

“Supreme Court overturns death sentence, cites inadequate defense”: Stephen Henderson and Emilie Lounsberry of Knight Ridder Newspapers provide this report.

The Associated Press is reporting: An article reports that “Police Kill Man at Seattle Courthouse.”

In news from Vermont’s federal death penalty trial, “Lawyer All but Concedes Defendant’s Guilt.”

An article headlined “Federal Appeals Court Limits Calif. Law” reports on this decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

And in Cobell v. Norton-related news, “American Indians Offer to Settle Suit.”

“U.S. Court of Appeals upholds censorship by Governors State University officials; Hazelwood standard can apply to public colleges as well as high schools, U.S. Court of Appeals for Seventh Circuit rules”: The Student Press Law Center issued this press release today, along with a press release entitled “Appeals court invites havoc says Student Press Law Center; Hosty v. Carter ruling opens door to censorship of college student expression.”

“Supreme Court Backs Government in Land Rights Case”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.

Tony Mauro is reporting: Now available online from law.com are news updates headlined “Justices expand doctrine while overturning death penalty case” and “High Court to Hear Case on 43-year-old Antitrust Precedent.”

“Shooting at federal courthouse”: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer provides a news update that begins, “Seattle police officers shot a man armed with a hand grenade several times today and apparently killed him in the lobby of the federal courthouse at Seventh Avenue and Stewart Street.”

“Specter: Supreme Court vacancy is not imminent.” Thomas Fitzgerald of The Philadelphia Inquirer provides a news update that begins, “Interest groups on the left and right are already poised in Washington for political warfare over the next Supreme Court nomination, but U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter said today that they probably will have to holster their weapons awhile. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80 and ailing from cancer, did not look like a man who is going to step down soon when he saw him at a luncheon with the congressional leadership last week, Specter said.”

“Appeals court to hear arguments on racial tiebreaker in Seattle schools”: The AP reports here that “Less than a week after a federal appeals court in Massachusetts upheld a school district’s voluntary desegregation plan there, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday will consider a similar plan by the Seattle School District.” That will be one of the en banc cases in which the Ninth Circuit will be hearing oral argument this week in San Francisco.

“Supreme Court Sides With City in Land Case”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Man shot at federal courthouse in Seattle”: The Seattle Times provides this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Suspect shot at Seattle federal courthouse.”

Update: MSNBC just wrapped-up televising live a press briefing given by an FBI representative and Seattle’s police chief. According to the police chief, the suspect appears to have been killed in the shooting and was attempting to enter Seattle’s new federal courthouse carrying one or more explosive devices.

“Rehnquist Retire? Think Again.” Tony Mauro has this article online today at law.com.

But just in case, the Judicial Confirmation Network offers this “Supreme Court Nominations Timetable” (via “Bench Memos“).

“US appeals court returns patent to Checkpoint”: Reuters provides this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

“Slate’s Jurisprudence: More Supreme Court Rulings.” This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Emily Bazelon appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

“Specter says Rehnquist’s retirement not necessarily imminent”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Chief Justice William Rehnquist doesn’t look like a man who is about to retire, Sen. Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Monday.”

“Bet here is new court won’t be southpaws”: Columnist Robert Robb had this op-ed yesterday in The Arizona Republic.

“The 100-0 Nominee? Who Cares.” That’s the subject of this week’s “Debate Club” feature online at legalaffairs.org. The participants in this week’s discussion are Wendy E. Long and Law Professor Stephen B. Presser.

“Justice Brown to Leave Supreme Court June 30; Procedures Clarified for High Court Actions”: The Judicial Council of California today has issued a press release that begins, “Justice Janice Rogers Brown, Associate Justice of the California Supreme Court, informed Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a letter last Friday, June 17, that her final day on the state’s high court will be Thursday, June 30, 2005.”

On June 8, 2005, the U.S. Senate confirmed Justice Brown, by a vote of 56-43, to a lifetime post on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Two criminal law rulings of note today from the U.S. Courts of Appeals: Click here to learn who is more forgiving of police tampering with a search warrant — Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski or Ninth Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher.

And what happens when a criminal defendant’s lawyer waives what turns out to be her client’s only winning issue on appeal by expressly abandoning it in the Reply Brief for Appellant but then seeks to revoke the concession after oral argument? A panel consisting of three stellar Seventh Circuit judges delivers this result.

“Top court won’t review sentencing guideline case”: James Vicini of Reuters provides this report.

Access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California discussing the impact of Blakely and Booker on criminal sentencing in that State: Today’s decision can be accessed here.

En banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit announces ruling in Hosty v. Carter: You can access today’s 7-4 ruling at this link. The Student Press Law Center previously referred to this case as “The Latest Battle for College Press Freedom.”

A unanimous three-judge Seventh Circuit panel had ruled in favor of the student-plaintiffs in a decision you can access here, thereby affirming the federal district court’s ruling in the case. Today’s en banc majority reaches the opposite conclusion, holding that the U.S. Supreme Court‘s ruling in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988), applies in the setting of a university.

“Bench Warfare: The coming battle over President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee.” Duncan Currie has this essay in the June 27, 2005 issue of The Weekly Standard.

“Top court overturns death sentence”: James Vicini of Reuters provides this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “High Court Rejects Telecom Rail Appeals.”

A list of the final twelve argued cases that remain pending for decision this Term before the U.S. Supreme Court: Here’s an update of the list I published Saturday, subtracting the decisions that the Court issued this morning.

The argued cases yet to be decided this Term are listed in order of oral argument, with the case argued longest ago listed first:

1. Kelo v. City of New London, No. 04-108, click here to access the question presented in this eminent domain-takings case (argued February 22, 2005);
2. Orff v. United States, No. 03-1566, click here to access the question presented in this third-party beneficiary breach of federal contract case (argued February 23, 2005);
3. Exxon Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., No. 04-70, and Ortega v. Starkist Foods, No. 04-79 (consolidated cases), click here to access the questions presented in these cases involving whether 28 U.S.C. §1367 authorizes the district courts to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the related claims of additional plaintiffs or plaintiff class members who do not themselves satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement (argued March 1, 2005);
4. Van Orden v. Perry, No. 03-1500, click here to access the question presented in this Ten Commandments case from Texas (argued March 2, 2005);
5. McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, No. 03-1693, click here to access the questions presented in this Ten Commandments case from Kentucky (argued March 2, 2005);
6. Castle Rock v. Gonzales, No. 04-278, click here to access the questions presented in this case involving a procedural due process claim against a local government for its failure to protect the holder of a partial restraining order from private violence (argued March 21, 2005);
7. MGM Studios v. Grokster, No. 04-480, click here to access the question presented in this copyright, file sharing, vicarious liability case (argued March 29, 2005);
8. Nat’l Cable & Telecomm. Ass’n v. Brand X Internet Servs., No. 04-277, and FCC v. Brand X Internet Servs., No. 04-281 (consolidated cases), click here to access the questions presented in this case involving the FCC’s regulation of cable internet services (argued March 29, 2005);
9. Mayle v. Felix, No. 04-563, click here to access the question presented in this case involving relation-back for statute of limitations purposes of an amendment to a state habeas corpus petition (argued April 19, 2005);
10. Halbert v. Michigan, No. 03-10198, click here to access the questions presented in this case that seeks to establish a Fourteenth Amendment due process right of appointed counsel for indigent defendants convicted by guilty plea (argued April 25, 2005);
11. Gonzalez v. Crosby, No. 04-6432, click here to access the question presented in this case involving whether a Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b) motion in a habeas case constitutes a prohibited “second or successive” petition as a matter of law (argued April 25, 2005); and
12. Bell v. Thompson, No. 04-514, click here to access the question presented in this death penalty case challenging the Sixth Circuit’s withdrawal of its opinion affirming the denial of habeas corpus relief six months after the time when issuance of that court’s mandate became mandatory (argued April 26, 2005)

The Supreme Court will next issue decisions in argued cases on Thursday, June 23, 2005.

“W.House mum on possibility of Rehnquist retirement”: Reuters provides this report.

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List and opinions in argued cases: The Supreme Court of the United States today issued decisions in the following six argued cases:

1. Rompilla v. Beard, No. 04-5462. Justice David H. Souter delivered the opinion of the Court, and the judgment under review was reversed. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Souter’s opinion here; Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s concurring opinion here; Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s dissenting opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

2. Dodd v. United States, No. 04-5286. Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court, and the judgment under review was affirmed. You can access the syllabus here; Justice O’Connor’s opinion here; Justice John Paul Stevens’ dissenting opinion here; Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

3. San Remo Hotel v. San Francisco, No. 04-340. Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court, and the judgment under review was affirmed. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Stevens’ opinion here; Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist’s opinion concurring in the judgment here; and the oral argument transcript here.

4. Graham County Water Dist. v. United States. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, and the judgment under review was reversed and remanded. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Thomas’s opinion here; Justice Stevens’ opinion concurring in the judgment here; Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s dissenting opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

5. American Trucking Ass’ns v. MI Public Service Comm’n, No. 03-1230. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court, and the judgment under review was affirmed. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Breyer’s opinion here; Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion concurring in the judgment here; Justice Thomas’ opinion concurring in the judgment here; and the oral argument transcript here.

6. Mid-Con Freight Sys. v. MI Public Service Comm’n, No. 03-1234. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court, and the jugdment under review was affirmed. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Breyer’s opinion here; Justice Kennedy’s dissenting opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

By my unofficial count, this leaves twelve other argued cases yet to be decided, because my earlier count of seventeen undecided cases listed the fifth and sixth cases above as a single entry.

Today’s Order List can be accessed here. The Court granted review in two cases today. The case of Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc., which I previewed here, remains pending.

In early press coverage, Hope Yen of The Associated Press reports that “High Court Orders New Death Penalty Trial.” The AP also reports that “High Court Declines to Rule on Sentencing” and “High Court Won’t Hear Suit Over Police OT.” And Bloomberg News reports that “Child Pornography Prosecution Revived by U.S. Supreme Court.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston offers reports on today’s rulings and orders here and here, respectively.

The Court will next issue opinions in argued cases on Thursday, June 23, 2005.

Just say Noe: The Toledo Blade today contains an article headlined “Judges mull options for returning Noe donations; For many, state rules limit any action until next primary.”

“Death Penalty Case to Begin in Vermont”: The Associated Press provides this report.

On the agenda: The Supreme Court of the United States today is scheduled to issue an Order List and opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. eastern time. My list of the seventeen argued cases that remain pending for decision this Term, setting forth the questions presented and other helpful links, can be accessed here.

At 1 p.m. eastern time, the Supreme Court of California is scheduled to issue an important criminal sentencing ruling (details here).

Finally, this afternoon in Atlanta, Georgia, Eleventh Circuit Judge William H. Pryor, Jr. will be sworn-in to a lifetime seat on that court. I congratulate Judge Pryor on having avoided membership in the “Wallace McCamant club” (details here and here).

“Searching for the Definition of ‘Mainstream'”: FOXNews.com today provides a report that begins, “Political candidates hoping to get elected or judicial nominees vying for the federal bench would do well to be in the ‘mainstream’ these days, though the media may try to distance themselves from the designation.”

“How does a conservative judge look?” James A. Davids has this op-ed today in The Daily Press of Hampton Roads, Virginia.

“Expert Says He Was Told to Soften Tobacco Testimony”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

In news from Kansas: The Associated Press reports that “Special session may pose challenges; Lawmakers might not stay focused on education funding” and “Special session interrupts work of lawmakers who farm.”

The Topeka Capital-Journal contains articles headlined “Special session out of ordinary; Only 20 have been called in state history“; “Farm work interrupted; Session chasing agri-lawmakers from their fields“; “Ralliers protest court ruling; School finance order oversteps authority, speakers say“; and “Session to take broad view; Local lawmakers to look beyond quick school fix.”

The Lawrence Journal-World reported yesterday that “Protesters decry school ruling.”

The Wichita Eagle reports today that “Survey finds funding showdown doubtful; More money likely.”

And The Kansas City Star reports that “Passions cool as session looms; Few legislators say they’d defy court” and “Kansans put off by court action; But most think schools need help.”

“Faith community should stay out of partisan political fights”: Yesterday in The Mobile Register, Randy Brinson had an op-ed that begins, “Since the compromise between moderate Democrat and Republican senators, there has been a wave of rhetoric among the leaders of many of the conservative evangelical groups who became personally embroiled in the controversy.”