“Supreme Court Limits Suits Against Patent Holders”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.

“Google nudes: A porn site’s lawsuit is bad news for the search phenom, but may be good news for companies that produce content.” Marc Gunther has this news analysis online at Fortune.

“Supreme Court Weighs Texas Redistricting”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this updated report.

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini reports that “Court considers Ohio tax credit for Jeep plant.”

And in other news, “Court reverses product-tying doctrine.”

“Alleged rape victim won’t have to view tape”: The Chicago Tribune provides a news update that begins, “A Cook County judge today backed off from his threat to send a woman to jail if she refused to view a videotape of her alleged rape, CLTV reported.” The print edition of that newspaper reported today that “Woman ordered to watch videotape; Contempt, dismissal possible in rape case.”

And The Chicago Sun-Times provides a news update headlined “Alleged rape victim doesn’t have to watch video.” The print edition of that newspaper reported today that “Woman must view tape of alleged rape.”

“Wonkette Live”: David Lat and Alex Pareene are fielding questions now at washingtonpost.com. Thus far, no questions about whether Assistant U.S. Attorneys should blog pseudonymously without knowledge of their superiors.

“Texas Redistricting Plan Gets High Court Review”: This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day.”

Relatedly, at National Review Online today, Edward Blum and Roger Clegg have an essay entitled “Don’t Get Your Robes Caught in the Thicket: The Court should leave gerrymanders alone.”

“New legal strategy: Show your hand early; Lawyers go to great lengths to win over the public arena as much as the court.” This article appears today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.

“Appeals court turns away ex-Louisiana governor’s latest appeal”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Wednesday turned down the latest effort by former Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards to win freedom after his May 2000 corruption conviction.” The decision is not yet available online at the web site of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

“O’Connor is face of Jamestown 2007; The former Supreme Court justice is named a leader of the events marking the 400th anniversary of America’s first permanent English settlement”: This article appears today in The Daily Press of Hampton Roads, Virginia.

And earlier today on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, members were “debating” a Resolution “Honoring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.”

In news from Canada: The Toronto Globe and Mail provides a news update headlined “Rothstein formally tapped for Supreme Court.”

And Canadian Press reports that “Rothstein ‘easy’ choice for top court, Harper says.”

The official announcement of the appointment can be accessed here.

The Associated Press is reporting: Gina Holland reports that “Supreme Court Weighs Texas Political Map.”

And in other news, “Justices Debate Tax Giveaways for Business.”

“Appeals court lets prayer ruling stand”: The Indianapolis Star provides a news update that begins, “The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago has denied Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma’s request for a stay of a federal judge’s ban on sectarian prayer in the House.”

The three-judge Seventh Circuit panel that considered the request for a stay voted 2-1 to deny the request and issued opinions that can be accessed here.

Senate Judiciary Committee battle between Idaho and California for a Ninth Circuit vacancy is postponed for two hours: The start time of today’s confirmation hearing for nominee N. Randy Smith has been pushed back to 4 p.m. from 2 p.m. eastern time. The Associated Press recently reported that “9th Circuit nominee creates battle between Idaho, California.”

Those U.S. Supreme Court law clerks don’t proofread like they used to: A reader emails with respect to today’s unanimous ruling that in footnote 4, on page 14 of the slip opinion, “The quotation of Lemley presumably should be ‘product,’ not ‘prodcut.'”

“Ban on abortion before House; Bill would allow exception only when mother’s health is endangered”: This article appears today in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi.

And The Associated Press reports that “Miss. Bill to Ban Most Abortions Advances.”

“About those 1st Amendment rights, Doh!” The Chicago Tribune today contains an article that begins, “A survey released Wednesday showcases a bit of data that should surprise nobody: Americans know more about ‘The Simpsons’ than they do about the 1st Amendment.”

“Ernie the Attorney” is now also “Ernie the Solo Practitioner”: Best of luck to Ernest Svenson on his new endeavor.

Alabama sex toy litigation ends not with a bang but a whimper: The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama yesterday issued a 56-page opinion that begins, “This opinion marks the third occasion on which this court has been required to address substantive due process challenges to an Alabama statute that criminalizes the commercial distribution of ‘any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.'” Yesterday’s decision upholds the law as constitutional.

The opinion, accompanied by an order entering summary judgment in favor of the State of Alabama, finally resolves the case in the trial court, although the plaintiffs have a right to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. My coverage of the Eleventh Circuit’s most recent earlier ruling in the case, from July 2004, can be accessed here.

In today’s edition of The Chicago Tribune: The newspaper reports that “Federal judges hail Lefkow’s slain kin.” The murders occurred one year ago yesterday.

In other news, an article reports that “Defiance pays off for abortion foe; Justices rule protests weren’t racketeering.”

Jill Zuckman reports that “Wisconsin’s lonely crusader fights on.”

And columnist John Kass has an op-ed entitled “Plenty of wrinkles in Anna Nicole story.”

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in an argued case: Today’s lone ruling issued in the case of Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., No. 04-1329. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court, except that Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. did not participate because the case was argued before he joined the Court. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Stevens’ opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court Rules in Printer Ink Case.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court defines market power on patents.”

“SCOTUS Tries To Get a Little Bit Pregnant: Why the broader abortion ban is the one that’s constitutional.” Jacob Sullum has this essay today online at Reason.

“Oral Argument in Cuno Today”: “TaxProf Blog” provides this post linking to press coverage and briefs.

“High Court Hears Texas Redistricting Case”: This segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“O’Connor, Smiley to join in Jamestown celebration”: The Richmond Times-Dispatch today contains an article that begins, “Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor will be an active participant in the national commemoration of Jamestown’s upcoming 400th anniversary, officials said yesterday.”

The Los Angeles Times is reporting: In today’s newspaper, David G. Savage has articles headlined “Celebrity Visit to the High Court; A low-key Anna Nicole Smith shows up for arguments in her inheritance case“; “Justices Close Book on ’80s Lawsuit Against Abortion Protesters“; and “Spending-Limit Law Gets a Chilly Hearing.”

And in other news, “High Court Rules for Oil Firms.”

“Former Playmate charms the court; Smith’s case goes to Washington and could leave with a surprising result”: Patty Reinert has this article today in The Houston Chronicle.

“Campaign Finance Cases Weighed; Vermont’s Limits Debated in Court”: Charles Lane has this article today in The Washington Post.

And The Rutland Herald reports today that “Justices rack Sorrell on campaign limits.”

“Views are mixed on domestic spying; Specialists doubt legality; some defend war footing”: Charlie Savage has this article today in The Boston Globe.

“Accused of Aiding Animals by Making Prey of People”: The New York Times contains this article today.

“The Texas Gerrymander”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

“Courthouse pays tribute to judge’s slain family”: The Chicago Tribune provides a report that begins, “Colleagues of U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow gave silent tribute today to the memory of her husband and mother, one year to the day after they were slain by an angry litigant.”

“Testimony is potentially damaging to Skilling, Lay; Ex-CEO of two units says Enron deliberately kept risk, loss out of the public’s view”: Mary Flood has this article today in The Houston Chronicle.

The New York Times reports today that “Jury Is Told Chief Backed Shifts in Enron Accounting.”

And USA Today contains an article headlined “Witness: Enron division was ‘a basket case’; Transfer to profitable unit hid losses from investors.”

“24-hour wait for abortion is upheld in Missouri”: This article appears today in The St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

And The Associated Press reports that “Mo. Court Upholds 24-Hour Abortion Wait.”

You can access yesterday’s unanimous ruling of the Supreme Court of Missouri at this link.

Joan Biskupic is reporting: In today’s edition of USA Today, she has articles headlined “Anna Nicole Smith stirs up high court; Ex-‘Playboy’ model seeks $88M from oil tycoon’s estate“; “Court rules for abortion protesters; Justices’ decision ends 20-year fight that centered on racketeering law“; and “Justices question Vermont campaign-finance limits.”

And in coverage from others, that newspaper today also contains articles headlined “High court case hinges on tax breaks as job bait; Cities that want auto plants sacrifice millions to win them” and “High court shoots down Chevron antitrust case; Rule joint venture with Shell didn’t hike gas prices.”