“Gun case presents quandary for Supreme Court justices”: Robert Barnes will have this article Monday in The Washington Post.

And in Monday’s edition of The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz will have an article headlined “U.S. Supreme Court to take on battle over gun rights.”

“Finding Untainted Jurors in the Age of the Internet”: In Monday’s edition of The New York Times, Adam Liptak will have an article that begins, “When Enron collapsed in 2001, thousands of employees at its Houston headquarters lost their jobs and savings, and the city’s economy reeled. Much of the public’s anger was directed at Jeffrey K. Skilling, the company’s former chief executive.”

Monday’s edition of The Times of London contains an article headlined “Enron appeal argues failure is not a crime.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Former Enron CEO could see new trial.”

“Prosecutors could try 9/11 suspect despite waterboarding, experts say”: Marisa Taylor of McClatchy Newspapers has an article that begins, “U.S officials once described the confession of accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed as a gold mine of intelligence that proved his role in a litany of terrorist plots. However, now his admissions – because they were made during interrogations in which he was waterboarded 183 times – have become a liability for the Justice Department as it readies to hold him accountable in a U.S. court.”

“Webinar”: Antonin Scalia’s co-author, Bryan A. Garner, has this “On Language” column in today’s edition of The New York Times Magazine.

“No doubt, the state’s high court tilts right; The court isn’t unfailingly conservative yet, but its rulings have begun to reflect the governor’s conservative philosophy; It is into that legal atmosphere that the issue of Pawlenty’s solo budget-trimming, called unallotment, will land next month”: Rochelle Olson has this article today in The Minneapolis Star Tribune.

“Liu is more than qualified to serve on appeals court”: This editorial appears today in The Sacramento Bee.

“U.S. Supreme Court: Gun case on way to Supreme Court creates strange bedfellows.” UPI has this report.

“2 sides file pile of paperwork in Prop. 8 case”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Finally, an end to Justice Dept. investigation”: In today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, law professor John Yoo has an op-ed that begins, “I’ve been under investigation for more than five years for legal advice that I gave in the immediate wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This month, the Justice Department’s top career lawyer finally put an end to the farce.”

“High court upholds Mack verdict”: Today in The Reno Gazette-Journal, Martha Bellisle has an article that begins, “The Nevada Supreme Court upheld a wrongful death verdict against former pawn shop owner Darren Mack in the 2006 fatal stabbing of his estranged wife, Charla, and kept intact a $560 million award for the couple’s daughter.”

You can access Thursday’s order of the Supreme Court of Nevada at this link.

“Enron review could free Conrad Black”: The Sunday Times of London contains this article.

And Reuters reports that “Enron’s Jeff Skilling takes fight to Supreme Court.”

“Reid says Bybee shouldn’t be punished in ‘torture memo’ case; Reid says jurist Bybee shouldn’t be disbarred”: This article appears today in The Las Vegas Review-Journal.

“Decision Could Allow Anonymous Political Contributions by Businesses”: Sunday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an article that begins, “The Supreme Court decision last month allowing corporations to spend unlimited money on behalf of political candidates left a loophole that campaign finance lawyers say could allow companies to pay for extensive political advertising while avoiding the disclosure requirements the court appeared to leave intact.”

“Supreme Court scrutinizes state, local gun control”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Justices to Weigh Venue Issues in Skilling Case”: John R. Emshwiller and Jess Bravin will have this article Saturday in The Wall Street Journal.

At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Srinivasan’s Star Rising at the Supreme Court.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has this oral argument preview.

“Chief justice to speak at UA; Law school students will be able to question”: The Tuscaloosa News today contains an article that begins, “United States Supreme Court Justice John Roberts plans to speak at the University of Alabama on March 9, the seventh of nine sitting justices to speak at UA. Since 1996, Roberts is the ninth justice to speak in the Albritton Lecture Series at the UA School of Law.”

And the University of Alabama School of Law has issued a news release headlined “Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. to Visit Alabama Law on Tuesday, March 9.”

“Rapid City attorney: Supreme Court appearance beyond compare.” Today’s edition of The Rapid City Journal contains an article that begins, “Arguing a case before the nation’s highest court was the ‘Super Bowl, World Series and Olympics all put together’ for attorney James Leach of Rapid City.”

You can access at this link the transcript of Monday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Astrue v. Ratliff, No. 08-1322.

“High court to define reach of gun-control laws; Does right to bear arms trump cities and states?” Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court case could limit local controls on firearms.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has this oral argument preview.

“Court throws out confession in Arizona Buddhist temple slayings; Police coerced a teenager to admit to the 1991 killings and did not properly read him his rights, judges rule”: Carol J. Williams has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s en banc Ninth Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Appeals court reinstates lawsuit over hot sandwich”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “It’s been nearly five years since carnival operator Frank Sutton bit into a chicken sandwich at a McDonald’s at a truck stop in the far corner of southwest Virginia. The legal world is still dealing with the ramifications.”

My earlier coverage of the Fourth Circuit’s non-precedential ruling appears at this link.

“Speech advocates await dogfight-video ruling”: David L. Hudson Jr. has this commentary online at the First Amendment Center.

“7th Circuit Judges May Testify in Retrial Over Web Threats”: law.com has this report.

Due to flawed Miranda warnings and an involuntary confession, the en banc Ninth Circuit orders a new trial for a man convicted of participating in the murder of nine individuals, including six monks, inside an Arizona Buddhist temple: You can access today’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

Update: In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court says temple killings confession involuntary.”

“Tracking Justice Stevens’ Milestones”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

Now that’s an expensive postage stamp! In 2003, the U.S. Postal Service issued a 37-cent first class stamp commemorating the end of the Korean War. The stamp depicted the image of soldier sculptures located at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC.

Thereafter, the sculptor of those soldiers brought suit against the USPS, asserting that he owned the copyright in the sculptures and that the postage stamp did not constitute a “fair use” of his sculptures. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims rejected the copyright infringement claim in a ruling from December 2008 that you can access here. The trial court ruled that the sculptor owned the copyright but that the postage stamp’s use of the images constituted fair use.

Today, however, the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has reversed that ruling, holding that the postage stamp’s use of those images did not constitute fair use. You can access today’s ruling at this link. As a result, the Federal Circuit’s decision holds that the USPS is liable to the sculptor and remands the case back to the trial court so that damages may be determined.

Earlier coverage of the case can be accessed here, here, and here.

In the March 2010 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Herman Obermayer has an article headlined “The William Rehnquist You Didn’t Know.”

Mark Hansen has articles headlined “Police De-text-ive: Is it a privacy violation to review messages on a work-issued pager?” and “You Say You Want a Revolution: In Booker plus five, there’s been rumbling but hardly rebelling.”

And Richard Brust has an article headlined “Batter Up” that begins, “At his senate confirmation hearing five years ago, chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. compared a Supreme Court justice’s role to that of a baseball umpire.”

“Deciding Who Decides Intellectual Property Appeals”: Law professor C. Scott Hemphill has posted this article online at SSRN (via “Legal Theory Blog“) addressing the U.S. Supreme Court‘s ruling in Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc.

Say what you will about the overall quality of police work, but protection from zombies and clowns appears to be at an all-time high: Last night, I had a post titled “Don’t arrest the zombies” reporting on an Eighth Circuit ruling that issued yesterday.

Today, The Tampa Tribune reports that “Man charged with wearing a clown mask in public.” And The St. Petersburg Times yesterday had a news update headlined “Tampa man jailed on charge of wearing illegal mask” that begins, “An 18-year-old Tampa man was jailed Tuesday afternoon, charged with wearing a clown mask on a public road.”

“Dodd Leading Effort To Blunt Ruling On Corporate Spending On Elections”: This article appears today in The Hartford Courant.

And The New Haven Register reports today that “Dodd opens campaign to change Constitution.”

“Court lets blind grad use aids to take bar exam”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Neb. lawmakers to discuss fetal pain abortion bill”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Death Penalty Is Thrown Out in Texas Murders”: In today’s edition of The New York Times, John Schwartz has an article that begins, “A Texas court threw out the death sentence on Wednesday of a man whose double murder conviction gained international attention because of revelations that the judge and prosecutor had had an extramarital affair.”

Today in The Austin American-Statesman, Chuck Lindell reports that “Divided court tosses death sentence for Hood; Appeals court grants new sentencing trial, says Hood’s jury received improper instructions.”

And The Dallas Morning News reports that “Death row inmate gets new punishment hearing.”

Yesterday’s ruling of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas consists of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

Earlier this week, columnist Rick Casey of The Houston Chronicle had a related op-ed entitled “Best clue: The case of the erotic candy.”

“EMI appeals ruling that Men at Work copied tune”: The Associated Press has this report.

My earlier coverage appears in a post titled “No Vegemite sandwich for you!”

“Philadelphia Jury Finds for Wyeth in Hormone Replacement Therapy Case; The verdict disrupts the streak of plaintiffs’ wins before Philadelphia Common Pleas Court juries in HRT mass tort cases”: Amaris Elliott-Engel has this article today in The Legal Intelligencer.

And Bloomberg News reports that “Pfizer wins cancer suit on Prempro.”

“‘Miranda’ Dealt One-Two Punch by High Court”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.