“Congress Has a Way of Making Witnesses Speak: Its Own Jail.” Today in The New York Times, Adam Cohen has an “Editorial Observer” essay that begins, “Congress and the White House appear to be headed for a constitutional showdown. The House of Representatives is poised to hold Joshua Bolten, the White House chief of staff, and Harriet Miers, a former White House counsel, in contempt for failing to comply with subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal.”

“Evolution and Texas”: The New York Times today contains an editorial that begins, “Is Texas about to become the next state to undermine the teaching of evolution?”

“Serving Life for Providing Car to Killers”: Adam Liptak has this front page article today in The New York Times.

“It’s Party Time For Dickie Scruggs In Oxford, Miss.; Home of Faulkner, Grisham Rallies Round a Lawyer Just Indicted for Bribery”: Paulo Prada and Peter Lattman have this front page article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Supreme Court May Take Up New York City Teacher Exam”: Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article that begins, “The Supreme Court is signaling that it may decide whether the teacher certification exam used by New York City illegally discriminates against minority applicants. Yesterday, the federal high court asked the Justice Department for its view on whether the court should take the case. The move doesn’t necessarily mean that the Supreme Court will hear the dispute, but it is a sure sign that the justices are interested.”

“U.S. military more open to gays serving openly; A group of retired generals, the current chief of the Joint Chiefs, and a majority of returning soldiers say full disclosure should replace ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ law”: This article appears today in The Christian Science Monitor.

And today in The Los Angeles Times, Nathaniel Frank has an op-ed entitled “Don’t need ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’; Rhetoric from presidential candidates aside, gays in the military have wide support.”

“High court may bar claims for FDA-approved drugs; Injured patients could be prevented from suing manufacturers; The cases may also affect lawsuits already filed”: The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today in the first of two cases this term that consumer advocates fear could shut courthouse doors to patients injured by FDA-approved drugs or medical devices.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Medtronic, Medical-Device Makers Seek to Block Patient Suits.”

CNNMoney.com reports that “Medical devices put to legal test; Protections for makers of catheters and other medical equipment are at stake as lawsuit against Medtronic goes before U.S. Supreme Court.”

And Minnesota Public Radio provides a written report headlined “Medtronic heads to the Supreme Court.”

“Secrets Case Eyes Jurors’ Religion”: Today in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article that begins, “As two pro-Israel lobbyists near trial on charges of trafficking in classified information, a federal judge is preparing to grapple with some thorny questions, such as what to ask potential jurors about their religion and whether it is legal to knock jurors off the case based on their perceived religious affiliations.”

In commentary available online at FindLaw: Carl Tobias has an essay entitled “The Successes of Chief Judge Mary Schroeder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: How She Set the Bar High.”

And Scott Douglas Gerber has a book review essay entitled “The Partisan Reaction to Clarence Thomas’s My Grandfather’s Son: How Reviewers Have Proven Themselves Unable to Put Politics Aside to Provide a Fair Assessment of the Justice’s Memoir.”