“Judge’s Votes Show No Single Ideology”: Today in The Washington Post, Jerry Markon has an article that begins, “Three years ago, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor ruled against a minister who had sued his church for age discrimination, and accused her Republican colleagues of judicial activism when they allowed the case to go forward.”

“High court asked to block Chrysler sale to Fiat”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court asked to delay Chrysler sale.”

Greg Stohr and Tiffany Kary of Bloomberg News report that “Chrysler Creditors Ask U.S. Justice to Stop Fiat Sale.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has posts titled “Chrysler and accidents yet-to-be“; “Big hurdle for Chrysler challenge“; “Key points of Chrysler challenge“; and “Lenders, consumers test Chrysler sale.”

“For Sotomayor and Thomas, Paths Fork at Identity”: Sunday’s edition of The New York Times will contain this article. Today’s newspaper, meanwhile, contains an article headlined “Behind Judge’s Spending and Income.”

The Los Angeles Times reports today that “Sotomayor was nudged into judgeship, associates say; Through key recommendations from influential mentors, the Supreme Court nominee built up a civic resume before taking the bench.”

Today in The Wall Street Journal, Naftali Bendavid reports that “Sotomayor Faulted Over Missing Memo.” And yesterday, Jess Bravin and Nathan Koppel had an article headlined “Nominee’s Criminal Rulings Tilt to Right of Souter.”

And Politico.com reports that “Jeff Sessions takes aim at ’empathy standard’” and “Robe factory prepares for new Supreme Court Justice.”

“U.S. May Permit 9/11 Guilty Pleas in Capital Cases”: This front page article appears today in The New York Times.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Sotomayor’s objectivity on bench is key question“; “Sotomayor’s courtroom manner a confirmation issue“; and “Too early to rule out Sotomayor filibuster.”

“Is Sotomayor a Judicial Activist? New Studies May Shed Some Light.” Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal has this report.

“New Scrutiny of Judge’s Most Controversial Case”: Adam Liptak will have this article Saturday in The New York TImes. Tomorrow’s newspaper will also contain an article headlined “Case in Court, New Haven Firefighters Wait and Work.” And today’s newspaper contains an article headlined “Sotomayor Rose on Merit Alone, Her Allies Say.”

Today in The Washington Post, Alec MacGillis, Amy Goldstein, and Robert Barnes have an article headlined “Sotomayor Speeches Woven With Ethnicity; High Court Nominee Criticized Stereotypes.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Speeches reveal more about Sotomayor’s thoughts on race; The Senate Judiciary Committee receives a file on the Supreme Court nominee’s life from Princeton onward; She has spoken on other occasions of ethnic identity and her hopes about ‘wise Latina’ judges.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has an article headlined “Many questions for Sotomayor on abortion; Thin record leaves senators seeking answers.”

And The Washington Times reports that “Sotomayor speech undercuts Obama claims; Credits Democratic Senator for her initial nomination.”

“Crist’s high court pick puts him in political center; Charlie Crist seated his fourth Supreme Court nominee, burnishing his reputation as a center-leaning governor”: The Miami Herald has this news update.

“Latina pride presents challenge and opportunity for Sotomayor”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

“Miss. Klansman’s conviction upheld”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi has a news update that begins, “Reputed Klansman James Ford Seale will remain behind bars because an appeals court split Friday on whether the statute of limitations has expired.” The newspaper has posted online today’s en banc order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit — which is not yet freely available online at that court’s web site — at this link.

And The Associated Press reports that “Klansman’s conviction upheld in 1964 kidnappings.”

Update: The ruling is now available via the Fifth Circuit’s web site at this link.

“Appeals court reinstates antitrust case against VeriSign”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update that begins, “A federal appeals court Friday reinstated a lawsuit against Mountain View-based VeriSign that alleges the company violated antitrust laws through its grip on the .com and .net domain name registration system. In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that an Internet industry trade group should be allowed to proceed to trial on claims that VeriSign has inflated the cost of domain names by engaging in predatory and monopolistic practices.”

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

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Sotomayor tastes: Pig innards, ‘Law & Order’“; “High roller for the high court: Sotomayor jackpot“; and “Cartoon of Sotomayor as pinata draws criticism.”

“Court Denies En Banc Review of JPL Background Checks Ruling”: This article appears today in Metropolitan News-Enterprise.

My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“State privacy law not hurting banks, feds say”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “The Obama administration has delivered a mixed verdict to the U.S. Supreme Court on California’s financial privacy law, which lets consumers keep banks from sharing information with affiliated companies about their savings accounts or buying habits.”

“Sotomayor on Appellate Judging and Its ‘Policy Impact'”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” along with a post titled “Supreme Court Justices Quit the Clubhouse.”

“Thomas, Scalia report big book earnings in 2008”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Hidden Camera Case Turns on Expectation of Privacy in Workplace”: law.com has this report.

Joel F. Dubina is now the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit: He became chief judge on June 1, 2009.

“Appellate judge asks Supreme Court to clarify privacy rights; The inquiry involves a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the government cannot review financial, psychiatric and medical records of employees at JPL and other aerospace contractors”: Carol J. Williams of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Full 9th Circuit declines to hear JPL privacy case.”

My coverage from earlier today appears at this link.

“Gender and heritage a frequent topic for Sotomayor”: The Associated Press has this report, along with an article headlined “Sotomayor dealt with media access, copyright issue.”

And at the “Legal Beat” blog of CQ Politics, Seth Stern has a post titled “Sotomayor Repeatedly Referenced ‘Wise Woman’ in Speeches.”

“Senate panel OKs Indiana judge”: The Indianapolis Star has a news update that begins, “The Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines today to approve the nomination of Indiana Judge David Hamilton to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Hamilton still must be confirmed by the full Senate.”

“Teach to America: Can judicial confirmation hearings really be transformed into ‘teachable moments’?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Sotomayor Favored for Top Court, Quinnipiac Poll Says”: Bloomberg News has this report.

“Circuit Nominees, DOJ Nominee Head to Full Senate”: This post appears at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“The bipartisan questionnaire completed by Judge Sonia Sotomayor is now available online”: So announces the web site of the Senate Judiciary Committee. You can access the completed questionnaire by clicking here.

At Politico.com, Josh Gerstein reports that “Sotomayor questionnaire delivered.”

And Dow Jones Newswires report that “Sotomayor Has Net Worth Of $740,000, According To Disclosure.”

Claiming not to have received notice of an appealable order as an excuse for an untimely appeal in the era of CM/ECF: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued this ruling today.

Because the Eighth Circuit itself now uses CM/ECF, one hopes that today’s decision comes to the attention of the losing party.

“White House delivers Sotomayor files to Senate”: The Associated Press has this report.

Over three published dissents, en banc Ninth Circuit denies review of three-judge panel’s ruling that granted a preliminary injunction against NASA’s requirement that “low risk” contract employees submit to in-depth background investigations: You can access today’s order denying rehearing en banc at this link. The appellate court today also issued an opinion concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc and three dissenting opinions (here, here, and here). Chief Judge Alex Kozinski‘s dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc is interesting not just because it is typically well-reasoned and well-written, but also because he not too long ago personally experienced the publication of some material that he mistakenly thought was private.

My earlier coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling can be accessed here and here.

Opponents of the NASA background investigation requirement have created this web site devoted to the case.

“2nd Circuit Judge Calabresi on Former Student and Current Colleague Sotomayor”: law.com has this report.

“Congress begins impeachment of Judge Kent”: The Houston Chronicle has this news update.

In commentary available online at Slate: Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Sotomayor’s Manly Man Ruling: Her bold ruling in favor of a man who claimed sex discrimination.”

And John Dickerson has essays entitled “More Better Judging: The White House’s attempt to end the debate about a Sotomayor speech will end up prolonging it” and “Sonia Goes to Washington: Sotomayor endures a marathon meet-and-greet in the Senate.”

“Where to put Guantanamo prisoners? They’re welcome in Colorado; Residents of Florence say they don’t mind the supermax prison outside town; And a few more terrorism suspects there wouldn’t bother them.” This article will appear Thursday in The Los Angeles Times.

“California Supreme Court considers suit over workplace spying; The justices appear unlikely to allow employers to spy on workers with hidden cameras, but are skeptical that two women who found a surveillance camera in their office had suffered serious harm”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

“Gritty First Job Shaped Nominee; Years as N.Y. Prosecutor Gave Sotomayor Firsthand Look at Crime and Punishment”: This article will appear Thursday in The Washington Post.

Thursday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times will contain an article headlined “Sotomayor a racist? Newt Gingrich takes it back; The former House speaker had joined Rush Limbaugh in calling the Supreme Court nominee a racist; Gingrich now says his words were ‘perhaps too strong and too direct,’ but Limbaugh stands firm.”

And Steven Thomma of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Fearing backlash, GOP tones down rhetoric on Sotomayor.”

“NRA asks Court to expand 2d Amendment”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

You can access the cert. petition at this link (via “The Volokh Conspiracy“).