“Some Gitmo Detainees Resist Move to Palau”: Jess Bravin has this article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“U.S. House impeaches Kent”: The Houston Chronicle contains this article today.

The Galveston County Daily News reports today that “U.S. House approves Kent impeachment.”

The Washington Times reports that “House impeaches Texas judge; Only 18 federal officials tried in more than 200 years.”

Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. House Impeaches Judge Kent; Senate to Hold Trial.”

And CQ Politics reports that “House Adopts Impeachment Articles Against Texas Judge.”

“City blames consultant in police exam delays”: Yesterday’s edition of The New Haven Register contained an article that begins, “A top city official ’emphatically’ dismissed any notion that the city was stalling for time on a police promotional exam to see how the U.S. Supreme Court rules in a landmark firefighters’ case.”

“Girl, 14, sued by club that hired her to strip”: This article appears today in The San Antonio Express-News.

“Sotomayoralities”: Columnist William Safire will have this installment of his “On Language” column in Sunday’s edition of The New York Times Magazine.

“Uncertain Evidence for ‘Activist’ Label on Sotomayor”: Charlie Savage has this article today in The New York Times.

“Supreme Court makes age-bias suits harder to win; The justices, overturning a jury award won by a 54-year-old who was demoted, say workers bear the full burden of proof”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

Joan Biskupic of USA Today reports today that “High court raises bar on age-bias lawsuits; Workers must prove age was major factor.”

And Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal reports that “Supreme Court Increases Burden on Age Bias Plaintiffs.”

“Justices Reject Inmate Right to DNA Tests”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Unparalleled and Denied.”

Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Court Limits Access to DNA Evidence; Justices Rule That Inmates Lack Constitutional Right to Testing.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court rules DNA tests for prisoners not a constitutional right; By a 5-4 vote, the justices say current protections are enough for convicts who believe old genetic evidence will exonerate them.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “The Supreme Court’s DNA ruling: Wrong on rights; The majority opinion by five conservative justice belittles the protections of the Bill of Rights.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has an article headlined “Court: Prisoners don’t have right to evidence; Roberts says access to DNA testing should be left for states to decide.”

law.com’s Tony Mauro reports that “High Court Rejects Post-Conviction DNA Access.”

And The Anchorage Daily News reports that “Supreme Court says Alaska rapist has no right to DNA test; Chief justice says William Osborne tried to side-step state procedures.”

“‘Data mining’ for drug companies goes to courts”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Benefits denied to girl conceived with dead father’s sperm; A U.S. appeals court says the Los Angeles 10-year-old is not entitled to Social Security survivor payments because of California inheritance law and lack of evidence the father gave consent”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Associated Press reports that “No benefits for LA girl born from dead man’s sperm.”

And Metropolitan News-Enterprise reports that “Court Upholds Denial of Benefits to Posthumously-Conceived Child.”

You can access Wednesday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“What is Fair Game for the Sotomayor Hearings?” Vikram David Amar has this essay online at FindLaw.

“Sotomayor’s ‘courtesy calls’ not just photo ops; Stream of visits crucial to confirmation”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

“Cities’ gun restrictions begin to topple; After big D.C. case in ’08, San Francisco and Philadelphia have seen setbacks for local gun controls; More laws are expected to come under fire”: The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“In stark legal turnaround, Obama now resembles Bush”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has an article that begins, “President Barack Obama is morphing into George W. Bush, as administration attorneys repeatedly adopt the executive-authority and national-security rationales that their Republican predecessors preferred.”

“Sotomayor quits women’s club after GOP criticism”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“The Ninth Justice” blog of National Journal has a post titled “Sotomayor Resigns From All-Female Club.”

The nominee’s letter today notifying the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee of the resignation can be accessed here.

And The AP also has a report headlined “Republican: Will Sotomayor represent ‘all of us’?”

“Judging John Yoo: The ruling that could actually lead to accountability for torture.” Ady Barkan has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“President Obama Nominates Judge Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. for the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and Judge Beverly B. Martin for United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit”: The White House has issued this news release today.

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella has a post titled “Two Federal Judges Nominated for Appellate Court Slots.”

“U.S. House impeaches Kent”: The Houston Chronicle has a news update that begins, “The House today impeached imprisoned U.S. District Court Judge Samuel B. Kent and sent his case to the Senate for trial. The Senate is expected to quickly convene a trial — possibly within a matter of weeks — to cut off the judge’s $174,000 annual federal salary. The House overwhelmingly adopted four articles of impeachment against the 59-year-old jurist on rapid-fire roll call votes over the course of 30 minutes. The vote on the first article of impeachment was 389-0. Not a single member of the House spoke on Kent’s behalf.”

You can view the four article impeachment resolution at this link.

“Court Stiffs Veterans Caught in Privacy Breach”: At Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post that begins, “Veterans suffering anxiety and paranoia following the theft of a government hard drive containing the medical histories and Social Security numbers of 198,000 of their brethren cannot recover financial damages, a federal appeals court says.”

My earlier coverage of Wednesday’s Eleventh Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Outstanding OT08 cases”: At this post, “SCOTUSblog” names the ten argued U.S. Supreme Court cases yet to be decided this Term. More decisions are expected to be announced on Monday at 10 a.m. eastern time.

“9th Circuit Rules in Favor of Plaintiff Who Received Unsolicited Text Messages”: At his “Spam Notes” blog, Venkat Balasubramani has this post about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today in Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc.

“In-Chambers Opinions: A Footnote to the Chrysler Case.” Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“In New York, Sotomayor Put Focus on the Poor”: Charlie Savage and Michael Powell have this article today in The New York Times.

“Spending bill pre-empts Kent impeachment”: This article appears today in The Galveston County Daily News.

On Wednesday, the newspaper reported that “Judge’s new job runs from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.”

And The Associated Press reports that “House postpones vote on judge’s impeachment.”

“Fumo, Arnao lose bids for a new trial”: Yesterday in The Philadelphia Inquirer, Emilie Lounsberry had an article that begins, “The judge who presided over the corruption trial of former State Sen. Vincent J. Fumo roundly rejected Fumo’s bid for a new trial yesterday, saying the evidence was ‘more than sufficient’ to support the sweeping convictions in the case.”

According to the article, the trial judge “also rejected defense arguments that he should have dismissed a juror who had posted Facebook and Twitter messages during the trial, saying they were ‘nothing more than harmless rumblings having no prejudicial effect.'”

You can access Wednesday’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Court upholds settlement in asbestos lawsuits”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to let an insurance company settle some asbestos lawsuits for about $500 million in exchange for blocking any future litigation resulting from its long relationship with Johns Manville Corp., once the world’s largest producer of asbestos.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Travelers wins asbestos case at U.S. Supreme Court.”

And Reuters reports that “US court rules for Travelers in asbestos case.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Bailey, No. 08-295, at this link.

“Supreme Court makes age bias suits harder to win; Justices, overturning a jury award won by a 54-year-old who was demoted, say workers bear the full burden of proof”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court sets high bar for age-bias suits; Older workers bear the burden of proof to show age was key reason they were fired or demoted.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court makes it harder to prove age discrimination.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Worker Age-Bias Suits Limited by U.S. Supreme Court.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., No. 08-441, at this link.

“Supreme Court: Prisoners Have No Right to DNA Evidence.” Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court rules DNA tests for prisoners not a constitutional right; By a 5-4 vote, the justices say current protections are enough for convicts who believe old genetic evidence will exonerate them.”

In Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Jennifer S. Forsyth will have an article headlined “Court Upholds States in DNA Testing of Convicts.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has articles headlined “Convicts have no constitutional right of access to DNA evidence, Supreme Court says; In a 5-4 decision involving a rape case in Alaska, the court leaves the issue to states” and “What impact will Supreme Court decision on DNA evidence have? The defendant’s advocates decried the court’s ruling against a convict’s right to such evidence, but Attorney General Eric Holder suggested it would have a limited effect.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court says convicts lack right to DNA testing.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court rejects right for criminals to DNA tests.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has posts titled “Court rejects DNA access claim” and “Handing off the DNA issue.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in District Attorney’s Office for Third Judicial Dist. v. Osborne, No. 08-6, at this link.

“High court rules in favor of ex-Enron executive”: The Houston Chronicle has a news update that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that former Enron broadband executive Scott Yeager cannot be retried on some charges because a jury in 2005 acquitted him of others related to the same alleged scheme.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this article reporting on the ruling.

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “US court rules for ex-Enron Broadband executive.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Enron Official Wins Round in Bid to Avoid Retrial.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Yeager v. United States, No. 08-67, at this link.

“PA court: Philly gun laws invalid.” The Philadelphia Inquirer has a news update that begins, “Two key provisions of Philadelphia’s most recent attempt to impose local gun controls – banning ‘straw purchase’ of handguns and banning assault weapons – were invalidated today by a state appeals court.”

And The Associated Press reports that “State court again strikes down Philly gun laws.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

Programming note: Weather permitting, my son and I are planning to spend this afternoon watching the Philadelphia Phillies host the Toronto Blue Jays at Citizens Bank Park.

Because we are taking public transportation to the game, and because we are planning to make a stop for lunch in South Philly on the way to the game, we’ll be heading out the door around the time that the U.S. Supreme Court will be announcing today’s rulings in argued cases.

“SCOTUSblog” will provide complete coverage of those rulings, and you can access the rulings via this link at the Court’s web site shortly after 10 a.m. eastern time today.

“San Diego lawyer and A’s settle class-action sex discrimination lawsuit”: The Oakland Tribune today contains an article that begins, “A San Diego lawyer and the Oakland Athletics baseball organization have settled a class-action lawsuit over a Mother’s Day weekend giveaway of free plaid reversible bucket hats.”

“Appeals Court Backs Prison for E-Mail Obscenity”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

My most recent coverage of the case can be accessed here.

“Sotomayor avoids firm answers on key issues”: The Associated Press has this report.

Today’s edition of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina contains an article headlined “La Raza drawn into debate; Sotomayor is a former member.”

And online at Reason, Steve Chapman has an essay entitled “Is Sotomayor Anti-Gun? When it comes to the Second Amendment, Obama’s Supreme Court nominee practices judicial restraint, not judicial activism.”

“Circuit Assignments May Give Most High Court Justices ‘Home Court’ Advantage”: law.com’s Tony Mauro has this report. The article reminds me of an observation I offered on May 4, 2009.