“Defeat for General Plan Initiative; U.S. court refuses emergency request to hear appeal”: The Monterey County Herald contains this article today.

“Government defends decision to fund Boy Scout event”: This article will appear Friday in The Chicago Tribune.

And The Associated Press reports that “Boy Scout jamboree case argued in court.”

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Justice Alito Joins Cert Pool Party.”

In news from the Ninth Circuit, “Strong Dissent in Porn-Related Computer Search Case; Warrant based only on Web site membership.”

In news from the Second Circuit, “Dismissed Athletic Director’s Retaliation Claim Reinstated in Hazing Case.”

In news from New York, “Tobacco Companies Handed a Win; States May Face $1B Loss.”

And Justin Scheck reports that “New Indictments Loom in Milberg Case.”

“This case presents an issue of first impression for this court: whether amending a complaint to add a defendant ‘commences’ a new suit under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit answered that question in the affirmative today in an opinion that you can access here.

“High court approves but limits informed consent abortion law”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A law requiring doctors to tell patients about abortion risks before performing the procedure won unanimous approval Thursday from the Florida Supreme Court, but the justices put some limitations on it.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Florida at this link.

Available online at Slate: Radley Balko has a jurisprudence essay entitled “No SWAT: The most important Supreme Court case you’ve never heard about.”

And Law Professor Bruce Ackerman has a jurisprudence essay entitled “The Perils of Judicial Restraint: If the Supreme Court won’t intervene on ‘enemy combatant’ cases, Congress must.”

Apologies in advance: Today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day” contained a segment entitled “Apologizing, Legally, in British Columbia” (RealPlayer required).

In other coverage, The Toronto Globe and Mail yesterday contained an article headlined “Safe to say ‘sorry’ with new B.C. bill; Legislation would allow parties in dispute to apologize without threat of legal fallout.”

And Canadian Press reports that “Act will remove legal liability of ‘sorry’; B.C. Apology Act to ‘promote early, mutually beneficial resolution of disputes.’”

“Happy Anniversary Prawfs!” Yesterday, “PrawfsBlawg” had this post commemorating its one-year anniversary.

Someday this will be the answer to the question “Which law school features the Crucial Swing Vote endowed chair in constitutional law?” Arizona State University yesterday issued a press release entitled “ASU names College of Law after O’Connor; Retired justice recognized for her lifelong contributions to public service for Arizona and the nation.”

The Arizona Republic reports today that “ASU welcomes O’Connor with renaming of law college.”

And the ASU Web Devil reports today that “Law school named after O’Connor; Renaming decision based on merit, not donation.” The Web Devil also offers an editorial entitled “Law school name change a relief; O’Connor contributed more than money.”

Second Circuit rules in favor of street preacher, declares unconstitutional City of Ithaca, New York’s noise regulations: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit can be accessed here.

“In these cases, we hold that facts stated in a presentence report may not, at sentencing, be deemed to be admissions by the defendant sufficient to bypass the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial as articulated in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), even though the defendant, who had been given the presentence report before sentencing, did not object to the facts.” A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today issued this circuit-split-creating decision.

“Judge Allows Sex Blogs Lawsuit to Proceed”: The Associated Press provides this report.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit holds that PROTECT Act‘s pandering provision is both substantially overbroad and vague, and therefore facially unconstitutional: In today’s decision, the Eleventh Circuit has declared unconstitutional a provision that prohibits the promotion of child pornography.

“Cities can keep out big stores; Court upholds law in Turlock designed to block Wal-Mart”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

And The Modesto Bee reports today that “Turlock wins one against Wal-Mart; Appellate court says ordinance against ‘big box’ stores legal.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate District at this link.

“For better or worse, being intentionally thrown at is a fundamental part and inherent risk of the sport of baseball. It is not the function of tort law to police such conduct.” Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California considering tort liability arising from a batter’s being intentionally hit by a pitched ball can be accessed here. My earlier post linking to the intermediate appellate court’s ruling is here.

“We consider whether a district judge may reject a guilty plea that satisfies all of the requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b).” So begins an opinion that Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Today’s decision holds that the district judge cannot reject the guilty plea.

Eighth Circuit rejects First Amendment challenge to Fayetteville, Arkansas’ prohibition on certain flashing electronic signs: Today’s ruling by a three-judge panel consists of an opinion from each judge on the panel.

Circuit Judge Steven M. Colloton‘s opinion concurring in the judgment begins, “In his ‘as applied’ challenge to Fayetteville’s prohibition on flashing or blinking signs, John LaTour contends that it is impermissible under the First Amendment for the city to make one exemption to its overall ban by allowing time-and-temperature signs without advertising matter, while precluding him from operating a flashing sign on which he wishes to post various political and religious (and perhaps commercial) messages.”

Divided three-judge Eighth Circuit panel holds invalid a Federal Bureau of Prisons regulation that limits the portion of an inmate’s sentence that can be served in a Community Corrections Center, commonly known as a halfway house: Today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit can be accessed here.

In today’s edition of The New York Times: The newspaper contains an article headlined “A Homecoming, in Los Angeles, for Five Klimts Looted by Nazis.”

And an editorial is entitled “Resolving the Wiretap Debate.”

“ACLU Suit Challenges U.S. Funding For Jamboree”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that “Pentagon, Boy Scouts fight court ruling on jamboree.”

The Washington Times reports that “Virginia takes Scouts’ side in suit.”

The Free Lance-Star of Fredericksburg, Virginia reports today that “Scout case set today; ACLU wants jamboree moved from Fort A.P. Hill; Federal court case includes brief from Virginia in support of the Scouts.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Boy Scout lawsuit back in court for appellate hearing.”

My earlier coverage, linking to the appellate court briefs, is here.

In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal: The newspaper contains an editorial entitled “Swing Justice: Anthony Kennedy attacks the media and wonders if liberals hate him.”

And Steven Greenhut has an op-ed entitled “The Anti-Kelo: A heavy government hand isn’t necessary for economic development.”

Just in time for baseball season: The Supreme Court of California today will decide a case presenting the question “Could a community college district be held liable to a student from another community college who was injured while participating in a preseason intercollegiate baseball game?”

In earlier press coverage of the case, the Metropolitan News Enterprise reported in August 2003 that “Community College Not Immune From Ballplayer’s Suit, C.A. Says.”

You can access the earlier ruling of a divided three-judge panel of California’s Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District at this link.

“The First Zacarias Moussaoui Sentencing Verdict: Eligible for Death Based on His Own Contradictory, Uncorroborated Testimony.” Elaine Cassel has this essay online at FindLaw.

Programming note: I am speaking at a West km event first thing this morning. Additional posts will follow.