“Judges Overturn Bush Bid to Ease Pollution Rules”: This article will appear Saturday in The New York Times.

And The Washington Post on Saturday will contain a front page article headlined “Looser Emission Rules Rejected; Court Says Changes By EPA Violated Clean Air Act.”

Available online from law.com: An article reports that “Lawyer’s Insults of Judges Escalate Into Speech Case; Diatribe goes to high court; could affect attorneys’ speech rights.”

In other news, “BlackBerry Deal Serves Up $200M Payout for Wiley.”

In news from California, an article is headlined “Oh, F**k It!” You can access the recent ruling of the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District at this link.

And the brand new installment of my “On Appeal” column is headlined “11th Circuit’s Abuzz With Sex Toy Litigation.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “Moussaoui Judge Will Allow Substitute Witnesses” and “Court Says New Pollution Rules Violate Clean Air Act.”

“Supreme Court: Ohio public records law trumps privacy rules.” The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Ohio’s public records law trumps federal medical privacy rules, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled today in ordering the Cincinnati Health Department to give a newspaper records on lead paint hazards.”

The article goes on to report, “Justice Terrence O’Donnell, writing for the court, said the justices faced a quandary: Federal law says the health records are protected unless state law requires releasing them — while Ohio law says public records must be released unless federal law protects them.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio can be accessed here.

“Measures could bloat ballot; Abortion might be only one of 14 issues”: This article appears today in The Argus Leader of Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

“Class Action Fairness Act”: The Legal Talk Network’s “Coast to Coast” program was devoted to that topic this week, and I was one of the guests. You can listen online by clicking here (Windows Media Player required).

One more reason not to shoot lawyers: The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Stalker Gets Life Sentence for Shooting Lawyer.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Man Gets Life for Shooting L.A. Lawyer.”

“Judge Accepts Compromise Deal on Moussaoui”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The federal judge in the death penalty trial of al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui accepted a government compromise Friday that will allow prosecutors to present new witnesses about aviation security.”

Today’s order of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia can be accessed here.

“11th Circuit’s Abuzz With Sex Toy Litigation”: That’s the provisional title of the brand new installment of my “On Appeal” column that law.com is scheduled to post online tonight. An archive of my earlier columns (currently omitting this week’s effort) can be accessed here.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Some in France See Moussaoui As Scapegoat” and “Lawyers Say Coaching to Aid 9/11 Airlines.”

An article reports that “Abortion Law May Affect S.D. Tourism.”

And in other news, “States Win Suit to Stop New EPA Standards.” Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can be accessed here.

Don’t meth with airport security: Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion that begins, “We must decide whether a prospective commercial airline passenger, who presented no identification at check-in, and who voluntarily walked through a metal detector without setting off an alarm, can then prevent a government-ordered secondary screening search by stating he has decided not to fly and wants to leave the terminal.”

D.C. Circuit becomes the latest federal appellate court to rule that the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 is not facially unconstitutional: You can access today’s ruling at this link.

“Court Lets Tenn. Issue Anti-Abortion Plates”: The Associated Press provides this report.

In today’s edition of The Harvard Crimson: An editorial is entitled “Searching for Trouble: Google shouldn’t be forced to give up its data.”

And a letter to the editor appears under the headline “Harvard Military Recruiting Stance Hypocritical.”

“To have federal courts, under the guise of applying the enduring principles of the First Amendment, reverse the ordinary application of high school football recruiting rules–where the core values of the Amendment are not even remotely involved–unduly trivializes these constitutional principles.” Today a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued that court’s latest ruling in Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass’n, a case that previously produced a ruling on the merits from the U.S. Supreme Court. The title of this post comes from the beginning of the dissent from today’s ruling that Circuit Judge John M. Rogers issued.

U.S. Supreme Court review of “Choose Life” license plate litigation has just become much more likely: Today, a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has upheld as constitutional a Tennessee statute making available the purchase of automobile license plates with a “Choose Life” inscription, but not making available the purchase of automobile license plates with a “pro-choice” or pro-abortion rights message. You can access today’s ruling at this link.

Today’s ruling gives rise to two different circuit splits. First, the Sixth Circuit panel unanimously rejects the Fifth Circuit‘s recent decision holding that the Tax Injunction Act precludes federal courts from hearing and deciding disputes of this nature. And second, the majority rejects the Fourth Circuit‘s recent decision invalidating a nearly identical specialty license plate law in South Carolina.

My coverage of the Fourth Circuit’s ruling (consisting of separate opinions from each of the three judges on the panel) is here, and my coverage of the Fourth Circuit’s order denying rehearing en banc (accompanied by concurring and dissenting opinions) is here.

My coverage of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling is here, while my coverage of that court’s order denying rehearing en banc over the dissent of eight of the sixteen judges authorized to participate in the voting is here.

News coverage of this week’s Sixth Circuit oral argument in the gender equality in high school sports case from Michigan: Wednesday’s edition of The Detroit News reported that “MHSAA states its new point on gender.”

And The Grand Rapids Press on Wednesday reported that “Michigan prep sports case jumps another legal hurdle.”

“New execution protocol released; Rules skirt issues that delayed Morales’ lethal injection, critics say”: Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, today has this article in that newspaper.

“Lafave not the only one whose fate is in judge’s hands”: Columnist Sue Carlton has this op-ed today in The St. Petersburg Times.

And yesterday, that newspaper contained an article headlined “New loves bloom from Lafaves’ failed union; After his wife’s infidelity with a teen, Owen Lafave has remarried; She may be next.” According to the article, the former schoolteacher is engaged to be remarried.

“R. Fred Lewis Named Chief Justice-Elect of Florida”: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of Florida issued this press release.

“Weare’s wisdom: Protect private property.” This editorial appeared yesterday in The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader.

“GOP puts judge’s ouster on fast track”: The Columbus Dispatch today contains an article that begins, “Ohio lawmakers vowed yesterday to swiftly start the process that could remove a Franklin County judge who sentenced an admitted child molester to probation. However, others warned that the unprecedented effort to oust a sitting judge could endanger the independence of the courts.”

And the newspaper today also contains a related article headlined “Probation not all that rare for sex offenders.”

“Tamper-Proof: Carla Martin’s witness tampering wasn’t rare, just sloppy.” David Feige has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Stifling Dissent”: The Richmond Times-Dispatch today contains an editorial that begins, “In a recent speech on foreign soil, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said people who disagree with her are dangerous, irrational, slavery-loving, bigoted threats to the country.”

“U.S. Lawyer in Terrorism Trial Suggests She Didn’t Act Alone; Carla Martin’s attorney says she was vilified as a ‘lone miscreant’ in the alleged tampering”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

Today in The New York Times, Neil A. Lewis reports that “U.S. Lawyer in Terror Case Is Put on Leave.”

The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that “Accusations baffling in Moussaoui case; How did U.S. lawyer so blatantly disregard the rules, experts ask.”

The Washington Times reports that “TSA lawyer put on paid leave in Moussaoui case.”

USA Today reports that “Lawyer in Moussaoui case put on leave.”

The Associated Press reports that “Moussaoui’s Fate May Hinge on Next Ruling.”

The Washington Post contains an article headlined “A Firm Grip on the Gavel; With Humor, Candor, 9/11 Judge Brinkema Sets a No-Nonsense Tone.”

And The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial entitled “Moussaoui’s Mess: A terrorist’s joy ride through the U.S. legal system.”

“Caught Up in DNA’s Growing Web”: Today in The New York Times, Harlan Levy has an op-ed in which he writes, “proposals by some to extend DNA databanks far beyond convicted felons, and even to the general population, go too far.”

“Abortion: Girls must get parent OK; Critic: ‘Teens mean nothing’ to Huntsman, lawmakers.” This article appears today in The Salt Lake Tribune.

And The Associated Press reports that “Gov. Signs Parental Consent Bill to Law.”

“Google Wins Copyright Battle; Archiving Issue Is Still Unclear”: The Wall Street Journal today contains an article (free access) that begins, “A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit accusing Google Inc. of wrongful conduct, including copyright infringement and defamation, providing the latest court opinion to weigh in on the contentious area of search engines and copyright.”

Reuters reports that “Judge dismisses Google copyright case.”

And c|net News.com reports that “Google wins a court battle.”

You can access the recent ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this link.

“A Different Take on the Supreme Court’s Recent Decision Concerning Law Schools’ First Amendment Rights and Campus Military Recruitment”: Vikram David Amar and Alan Brownstein have this essay today online at FindLaw.