The state of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is “very good”: So reported Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul R. Michel in remarks delivered yesterday.

Did the Village of Glendale, Ohio violate the First Amendment when it adopted an ordinance forbidding the placement of for-sale signs on automobiles located on the public streets? By a vote of 8-7, the majority of the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit answers “perhaps.” The dissenters would answer “no.” You can access today’s ruling at this link.

The Institute for Justice, which represented the plaintiff challenging the ordinance, achieved victory before the en banc court by convincing two Republican appointees to join the Sixth Circuit’s Democratic appointees in ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The dissenters, meanwhile, were all appointed to the court by Republican presidents.

My coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling in this case — a 2-1 ruling in favor of Glendale where the dissenter was a federal district judge sitting by designation — can be accessed here.

“[A]s requested by Dow Jones, we will release those redacted portions of Judge Tatel’s concurring opinion and the two ex parte affidavits that discuss grand jury matters revealed either during the Libby trial or by grand jury witnesses themselves.” On February 15, 2005, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision upholding the adjudications of civil contempt against reporters Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper. Circuit Judge David S. Tatel‘s opinion concurring in the judgment, as originally published, reflected extensive redactions. Since then, the D.C. Circuit has made public some of the redacted portions of Judge Tatel’s opinion.

Now that the Lewis “Scooter” Libby trial has concluded, Dow Jones asked the D.C. Circuit to make public the rest of the redacted portions. In a per curiam decision issued today, the appellate court has agreed to make public more, but not all, of the redacted portions.

“Roberts Steered U.S. Supreme Court as It Trimmed Precedents”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News provides this report.

“Supreme Court to Review Guantanamo Cases”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court, reversing course, agreed Friday to review whether Guantanamo Bay detainees may go to federal court to challenge their indefinite confinement.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to rehear detainee cases.”

You can access today’s Order List at this link.

In other coverage of today’s orders, The AP reports that “Court Allows Student’s Anti-Bush T-Shirt.”

Access online video of today’s “2006-2007 Supreme Court Term Review” hosted by the American Constitution Society: Background on the panelists and a link to the video can be accessed via this link. Or you can access the video directly by clicking here (Windows Media Player required).

In Friday’s edition of The Washington Post: Robert Barnes will have a front page article headlined “Divided Court Limits Use of Race by School Districts.” And Charles Lane will have a related news analysis headlined “Narrow Victories Move Roberts Court to Right; Decisions Ignore Precedent, Liberal Justices Contend.”

In other news, Charles Lane will have an article headlined “Execution of Schizophrenic Killer Blocked By High Court.”

And Ylan Q. Mui and Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “High Court Overturns Century-Old Antitrust Rule; Manufacturers Gain Say on Retail Prices.”

In Friday’s issue of The New York Times: Linda Greenhouse will have an article headlined “Supreme Court Votes to Limit the Use of Race in Integration Plans.” Adam Liptak will have a related news analysis headlined “The Same Words, but Differing Views.” And an article will report that “School Ruling Leaves Unanswered Questions.”

In other news, “Justices Block Execution of Delusional Killer.”

And an article will report that “Supreme Court Lifts Ban on Minimum Retail Pricing.”

Available online from law.com: An article is headlined “Mover Fails to Prove Jurisdiction in Suit Over Internet Site.” My earlier coverage appears at this link.

And in other news, “Forfeiture of Wife’s Share of Home Over Husband’s Marijuana Is Found Excessive.” My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“Supreme Court Strikes at Affirmative Action; Divided Justices’ Ruling Will Affect Schools Nationwide”: Jan Crawford Greenburg and Ariane de Vogue have this report online at the web site of ABC News.

Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “Supreme Court Rejects School Desegregation Plan” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Plan Will Be Modified, School Board Member Says“; “High Court Blocks Mentally Ill Inmate’s Execution“: “Court Gives Manufacturers Leeway on Pricing“; and “Adjudicating the White House Subpoena Dispute.”

And today’s broadcast of “Talk of the Nation” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Rules on Race in the Classroom” featuring David G. Savage.

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Justice Kennedy’s Remarkable OT06”: Jason Harrow has this post at “SCOTUSblog,” which had quite a few page views today.

“Death Penalty for Delusional Murderer Blocked”: The New York Times provides this news update.

“Resegregation Now”: This editorial will appear Friday in The New York Times.

If a federal criminal defendant signs a plea agreement waiving his right to challenge his conviction and sentence, is it ineffective assistance of counsel for the defendant’s attorney to fail to file a notice of appeal challenging the conviction and sentence when directed by the client to do so? Two more federal appellate courts today have answered “yes” — the Fourth Circuit and the Fifth Circuit.

“At issue today is the constitutionality of several zoning and public nudity ordinances adopted by the City of Daytona Beach to regulate adult theaters.” So begins a ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today. The appellate court holds that all of the challenged ordinances are constitutional.

“Supreme Court rejects racial diversity plans; In a major civil rights ruling, a narrow majority struck down two school-enrollment plans”: Warren Richey will have this article Friday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Sorry Now?: What do the liberal and moderate lawyers who supported John Roberts’ nomination say today?” Emily Bazelon has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Day to Day“: The broadcast contained audio segments entitled “Justices Reject Race as Factor in School Placement” and “Supreme Court Term Defined by Close Splits” (RealPlayer required), both featuring Dahlia Lithwick.

law.com’s Tony Mauro is reporting: Now available online are news updates headlined “Supreme Court Strikes Down Race-Based School Programs” and “High Court Overturns Dr. Miles Rule.”

“Commentary: The impact of fervent dissent.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Sharp Shift to the Right in First Full Term of the Roberts Court; Liberal Justices Play New Role in Dissenting From the Bench”: ABC News correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg provides this written report.

“Minimalists vs. Visionaries: The real divide on the Supreme Court is between two kinds of conservatives.” Law Professor Cass R. Sunstein has this op-ed online today at the web site of The Washington Post.

“Court Blocks Execution of Mentally Ill Inmate”: Charles Lane of The Washington Post provides this news update.

Henry Weinstein of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “High court spares mentally ill killer from execution; A split U.S. Supreme Court rules that a Texas death row inmate’s illness prevents him from understanding why the state would kill him.”

Patty Reinert of The Houston Chronicle provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court halts Texas man’s execution.”

Todd J. Gillman of The Dallas Morning News provides an update headlined “Supreme Court blocks Texas man’s execution.”

And The Fort Worth Star-Telegram provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court blocks Texas execution.”

“Supreme Court strikes down school integration policies”: David G. Savage and Joel Havemann of The Los Angeles Times provide this news update.

Joan Biskupic of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court rejects public school diversity plans.”

And The Seattle Post-Intelligencer provides a news update headlined “Court rejects Seattle district’s use of race in school assignments.”

“Justices End 96-Year-Old Ban on Price Floors”: The New York Times provides this news update.

“Supreme Court Review”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Law Professors Douglas Kmiec and Jonathan Turley appeared on today’s broadcast of the public radio program “Here & Now.”

“High Court Rules on Race in Schools”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Mistrial Sought in Jose Padilla Case“; “Libby Becomes Inmate No. 28301-016“; and “White House Asserts Executive Privilege.”

“Supreme Court curbs use of race in setting school policies”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers provides this report.

In news updates from The Louisville Courier-Journal: The newspaper provides updates headlined “2007-08 school-year assignments will not change“; “Supreme Court: Jefferson County’s student-assignment plan unconstitutional“; and “Ruling prompts press conferences.”

Maybe, as in that famous episode of “The Munsters,” they can simply paint a while line down the middle of the house: The Associated Press provides a report headlined “Court: Feds Can Seize Half of House.” You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Race-Based Pupil Placements Banned by Top U.S. Court” and “Minimum-Price Accords May Be Allowed, Top Court Says.”

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini has an article headlined “Court rejects race as factor in school programs.”

And in other news, “Supreme Court hands business groups victory; Against wishes of 37 states, consumer groups, justices rule that some minimum prices set by manufacturers are no longer illegal.”

“Court Limits Use of Race to Achieve Diversity in Schools”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post provides this news update.