“Justice Antonin Scalia ticketed for GW Parkway fender-bender; will he take it to court?” The Washington Post’s “The Reliable Source” column has this report.

From the “judges make mistakes too” file: An errata sheet that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued today states, “On page 22, line 4, ‘statue’ is changed to ‘statute.'”

“Court: Eagle feathers only for American Indians.” The Associated Press has this report on a lengthy ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued today.

The opinion begins, “This case requires us to navigate the treacherous terrain at the intersection of the federal government’s obligations, on the one hand, to refrain from imposing burdens on the individual’s practice of religion, and, on the other, to protect key aspects of our natural heritage and preserve the culture of Native American tribes.”

“Federal Judge Is Remembered for Vigorous Dissent in Mountaintop Case”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has a report (via The New York Times) that begins, “A federal appeals court judge who died last week played a major role in several major environmental cases.”

“Appeals court overturns release of Gitmo detainee”: The Associated Press has this report.

My earlier coverage of today’s D.C. Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Murder an accident? To insured it is, court says.” The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the New York State Court of Appeals issued today.

“Justices Take Up Key Issue in Wal-Mart Bias Suit”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Justices question next step for massive Wal-Mart discrimination suit.”

James Oliphant of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court hears arguments in Wal-Mart sex discrimination case; The class-action suit contends Wal-Mart discriminated against women working for the company in terms of pay and promotion; The issue before the Supreme Court involves whether the women’s claims are too diverse for a single action.”

Jess Bravin and Ann Zimmerman of The Wall Street Journal have a news update headlined “Justices Challenge Gender Suit Against Wal-Mart.”

Greg Stohr and William McQuillen of Bloomberg News report that “Wal-Mart Worker Class-Action Case Questioned by High Court.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Wal-Mart opposes big sex-bias case at US top court.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “High court debates Wal-Mart discrimination claims.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “A fatal flaw detected? The massive class-action lawsuit against discount retailer Wal-Mart lost momentum, and perhaps more than that, in the oral argument before the Court on claims of widespread sex bias against its female workers.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, No. 10-277.

“In this order we address whether counsel * * * should be sanctioned for the extensive use of improper confidentiality markings in the briefs * * * contrary to Rule 28(d) of the Federal Circuit Rules.” Watch out Seventh Circuit, the Federal Circuit seems eager to vie for the distinction of federal appellate court that’s most likely to threaten or actually impose sanctions for rule violations.

Today, the Federal Circuit imposed a $1,000 sanction on an attorney who, in that court’s view, designated as confidential too much of the substance of an appellate brief. You can access today’s ruling in the matter ominously captioned In re Violation of Rule 28(d) at this link.

“Court May Make It Easier to Invalidate an Invention”: Steve Seidenberg will have this article in the April 2011 issue of ABA Journal magazine.

“Thoughts on the Future Viability of Public Financing Plans After McComish“: Rick Hasen has this post today at his “Election Law Blog.”

“Court hears argument in Wal-Mart sex bias claim”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this updated report.

D.C. Circuit reverses the grant of habeas corpus in favor of Guantanamo detainee Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman: You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link. Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote the opinion.

In April 2010, “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times” reported on the district court’s ruling in a post titled “Federal Judge Grants Habeas Writ Due to Torture Issues.”

And the “Lawfare” blog has reported on the case in posts titled “Uthman Oral Argument Summary“; “Uthman Oral Argument Preview“; “Public Merits Briefing Complete in Uthman v. Obama“; “Dafna Linzer on Secret Opinion in Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman Case.”

“Court seems to frown on Ariz. campaign regulation”: Tony Mauro has this news analysis online at the First Amendment Center.

“Scalia in fender-bender on way to court”: The Associated Press has this report.

Access online today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court today issued two rulings in argued cases and dismissed one argued case as improvidently granted.

1. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court in Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County, No. 09-1273. The ruling was unanimous, with Justice Elena Kagan recused. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Connick v. Thompson, No.09-571. Justice Antonin Scalia issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. And Justice Ginsburg issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. The Court issued a per curiam order dismissing the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted in Tolentino v. New York. No. 09-11556. You can access the oral argument via this link. This is the case that D.C. Circuit nominee Caitlin J. Halligan argued two Mondays ago.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court: Exonerated inmate doesn’t get $14 million” and “High court limits lawsuits over drug prices.”

“Roy Moore may run for president”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, known as the ‘Ten Commandments judge,’ said he’s considering seeking the Republican presidential nomination.”

“Barry Bonds’ ex says he discussed steroid use”: Lance Williams has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

In today’s edition of The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz reports that “Ex-mistress testifies at Barry Bonds perjury trial.”

The New York Times reports that “Ex-Girlfriend Details How Bonds Changed.”

And The Associated Press has a report headlined “Bonds trial: Ball players on deck to testify.”

“Supreme Court justices aren’t political hacks in robes”: The Washington Post contains this editorial today.

“Case of Haines City Officer’s Shooting Heads to United States Supreme Court Today”: This article appears today in The Lakeland (Fla.) Ledger.

“Court hears argument in Wal-Mart sex bias claim”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Wal-Mart opposes big sex-bias case at top court.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Justices to hear appeal over Wal-Mart gender pay lawsuit.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “Can A Business Be Too Big For A Class Action Suit?” featuring Nina Totenberg.

And Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court set to take up massive Wal-Mart discrimination case; On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will decide whether 1.5 million women can form a ‘class’ that faced the same injury — in this case, gender-based discrimination by Wal-Mart — or not.”

“2010 Law Prof Blog Rankings”: Paul L. Caron has this post today at “TaxProf Blog.”

“Court rivals spar over state constitution; Prosser, Kloppenburg differ on using state document to expand Bill of Rights”: This article appears today in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, along with a related article headlined “Matching funds for state Supreme Court races may face challenge; Similar law in Arizona faces court skepticism.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Fight over Wis. union law heads to court.”