“Scalia: Court confirmation process has changed.” The Providence (R.I.) Journal provides this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Scalia says he’d have difficulty winning confirmation now.”

Elsewhere, Broadcasting & Cable reports that “Scalia to Appear on Camera for C-SPAN; Supreme Court Justice to Make Rare On-Camera Appearance for Cable Public-Affairs Network’s Students and Leaders Series.”

Lawsuit filed in federal court alleging that the University of Texas at Austin unlawfully uses race in admissions decisions to fill the remainder of its incoming freshman classes after applying Texas’s “top ten percent” law: I have posted online at this link a copy of the complaint filed today initiating suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The plaintiff is a Caucasian woman who, at the time of her application to UT Austin, ranked in the top twelve percent of her high school class.

Please note: I have corrected the title of this post to more accurately reflect the claim being asserted in the lawsuit.

Update: “The lowdown on higher education” blog of The Austin American-Statesman has a post titled “UT sued for considering race in admissions.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal lawsuit filed over UT race-based admissions policies.”

Nine Ninth Circuit judges dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc in case where a district court entered an order declaring the plaintiff a vexatious litigant and requiring him to obtain leave of the court before filing another similar action in the Central District of California: You can access today’s dissents from the denial of rehearing en banc at this link. Last August, a unanimous three-judge Ninth Circuit panel issued a decision affirming the so-called “pre-filing order.”

In the latest installment of Ballard v. Commissioner, the Eleventh Circuit orders reinstated the findings of the tax court’s special trial judge in favor of the taxpayers: You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in this case in March 2005.

“Court OKs enhanced sentence legislation”: The Honolulu Advertiser today contains an article that begins, “The Hawai’i Supreme Court has approved a new state law, passed by the Legislature in special session last year, that changes procedures for imposition of ‘enhanced’ sentences of criminals identified as dangers to the community.”

Last week’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Hawaii consists of a majority opinion; an opinion concurring and dissenting; and a dissenting opinion.

“Alaska organization weighs in on Supreme Court gun decision”: This article appears today in The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

And today in The Scotsman, Stephen McGinty has an op-ed entitled “Gunning for the right to bear arms.”

Finally, in somewhat related news, The Toledo Blade today contains an article headlined “Concealed carry: Ohio justices to enter fray over gun laws; High court to decide home-rule authority.” The case is scheduled to be argued Wednesday before the Supreme Court of Ohio. That court’s own preview of the case is headlined “Does State ‘Concealed Carry’ Law Preempt Local Ordinance Banning Weapons In City Parks?”

“Motorists who paid abusive driver fines to be offered refunds”: The Virginian-Pilot today contains an article that begins, “The Virginia Supreme Court will send letters this week to some of South Hampton Roads’ worst drivers, offering them refunds for drunken- and reckless-driving fees.”

“Expert who changed mind claims immunity, but plaintiffs still sue”: American Medical News, a publication of the American Medical Association, provides this report on a case that produced a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit last month.

“Costco, Kinko’s Battle Trial Lawyers Over Credit-Card Receipts”: Cynthia Cotts of Bloomberg News has a report that begins, “Costco Wholesale Corp., FedEx Corp.’s Kinko’s unit and scores of other retail companies are under siege by lawyers pursuing them for billions of dollars in damages through a new federal identity-theft law. Lawyers are filing suits that put retailers at such financial risk, to the point of threatening bankruptcy, that some judges are refusing to certify them as class actions.”

According to the article, one such case is now pending on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Blawg Review #154”: Posted today, at “”HealthBlawg.”

“Judge strips Texas of its ‘pole tax’; The Legislature’s imposition of a $5-per-patron fee on strip clubs is declared unconstitutional”: The Los Angeles Times contains this article today.

“Could a hung jury force second Wecht trial?” This article appears today in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

And yesterday in The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Jason Cato reported that “Cost of Wecht’s case put at $204,000.”

“Obama’s Second-Amendment Dance”: Columnist Robert D. Novak has this op-ed today in The Washington Post.

“Judge asks state’s high court to block case against him”: Last Wednesday, The St. Petersburg Times published an article that begins, “Attorneys for 1st District Court of Appeal Judge Michael E. Allen on Tuesday asked the Florida Supreme Court to block the Judicial Qualifications Commission from proceeding against him. It marks the first time a judge has asked the high court to step in and stop the JQC. Allen’s attorney, Bruce Rogow, said the unprecedented step is called for because what the JQC is doing to Allen itself is unprecedented.”

And The News-Press of Fort Myers, Florida reported last week that “Judge asks state justices to throw out disciplinary proceeding.”

You can access the judge’s Quo Warranto Petition, filed last Tuesday in the Supreme Court of Florida, at this link. And on Friday of last week, Florida’s highest court ordered that a response be filed.

I discussed this case in the May 14, 2007 installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com, headlined “When Should a Judge Face Discipline for What an Opinion Says?”

“Another Test for Habeas Corpus: Supreme Court justices should rule that two American civilians held in Iraq have a right to review by a United States court.” This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

“The School Crotch Inspector: Fighting the Advil menace, one strip search at a time.” Jacob Sullum has this essay online at Reason. Sullum’s essay focuses on a decision that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued last September. My earlier coverage of that ruling appears at this link.

The case was reargued before an eleven-judge en banc Ninth Circuit panel late last month. You can access the en banc oral argument audio via this link (9.27MB Windows Media audio file).

“Yoonited States of America: The Bush ‘torture memo’ released this week is getting a lot of attention–but for the wrong reasons.” Benjamin Wittes has this essay online at The New Republic.

“Kansas Court Weighs Health Records in Abortion Case”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

And The Lawrence Journal-World reports today that “Half of Kansas abortions on visitors; Many women cross state line for procedure, especially in late term.”

“Ohio’s Lethal Injection Rules Questioned”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“Neutrality and Justice”: This editorial, which begins with a quote from a Ninth Circuit opinion, appears today in The New York Sun.

“A Small Religion Brings a Big First Amendment Question to the Supreme Court: When Does Private Religious Speech Become Government Speech?” Michael C. Dorf has this essay online today at FindLaw.

“Camp Justice: Everyone wants to close Guantanamo, but what will happen to the detainees?” Jeffrey Toobin has this Annals of Law article in the April 14, 2008 issue of The New Yorker.