“What’s Your Sign? A Supreme Court case that puts Scalia and gay rights advocates on the same side.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Justices’ Ruling Blocks Cross Removal”: Adam Liptak will have this article Thursday in The New York Times.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Vets win Supreme Court victory in ‘Mojave cross’ case; The cross on a desert hilltop in the Mojave National Preserve in California has stood since 1934. Opponents say having the Mojave cross on public land violates the constitutional prohibition on government endorsement of religion.”

And Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “High court rules cross doesn’t violate separation of church and state.”

“Conservative group doesn’t sway Scalia in ballot signature case”: Les Blumenthal of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

And The Seattle Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court skeptical on keeping Ref. 71 petition names secret: Democracy takes ‘civic courage.’”

“New war court manual reaches Guantanamo”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this news update.

“Jury sides with SM company in love-doll case”: The North County Times of Escondido, California has a news update that begins, “A Valley Center man must pay nearly $300,000 to his former employer after breaking away to start his own love-doll company, a Vista Superior Court jury decided Wednesday.”

Earlier, the newspaper reported that “‘Love doll’ entrepreneurs battle in North County court.”

“Stevens hears last argument as justice”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press has this report.

“On Supreme Court’s Final Argument Day, First Amendment Dominates”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Much ado about a little cross”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“NJ court agrees to hear US senator recall case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “New Jersey’s highest court has agreed to hear the case of a tea party group seeking to recall one of the state’s U.S. senators.”

“Supreme Court supports cross on federal land in Calif.” Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

“Jessica Seinfeld wins NY culinary copycat claim”: The Associated Press has this report on a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“Without Scalia, whither anonymity?” At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post that begins, “Justice Antonin Scalia, using history, sarcasm and political taunts, laid down a barrage of objections Wednesday to a plea that the Supreme Court create a new constitutional right of anonymity for individuals who sign petitions to get policy measures onto election ballots.”

And Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press reports that “Court skeptical on keeping signers’ names private.”

“Supreme Court says Mojave cross can stand; In a divided ruling, the justices rule that the 1st Amendment calls for ‘accommodation’ of religious displays on public land rather than strict separation of church and state”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Cross in National Preserve Backed by U.S. High Court.”

“This is another case brought by Michigan trial attorney and politician Geoffrey Fieger regarding his feud with several justices of the Michigan Supreme Court.” So begins an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.

Access online today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in an argued case: The Court today issued its ruling in Salazar v. Buono, No. 08-472, the case involving the Mojave cross.

You can access the Court’s ruling at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion in which the Chief Justice joined and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined in part. The Chief Justice issued a concurring opinion. Justice Alito issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Antonin Scalia issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Clarence Thomas joined. Justice John Paul Stevens issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor joined. And Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High court says Mojave cross in Calif. can remain.”

Update: It is interesting to note that the case will now be remanded for the district court to conduct proceedings that a majority of the Justices view as unnecessary or inappropriate.

“Court: Oneida Indian Nation can ignore tax collector.” Today’s edition of The Post-Standard of Syracuse, New York contains an article that begins, “When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that the Oneida Indian Nation had to pay property taxes, much of Madison and Oneida counties rejoiced. A federal appeals court on Tuesday, however, stripped the counties of the power to actually collect those taxes. A panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said that, while the tribe might owe taxes, it can’t be taken to court because it’s sovereign.”

The Oneida Daily Dispatch reports today that “Court rules that Madison and Oneida counties can’t foreclose on Oneida Indian Nation land.”

And The Utica Observer-Dispatch contains an article headlined “US judges: Counties can’t foreclose on Oneidas.”

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

“Calif. Justices Sharply Divided in Arbitration Ruling”: Mike McKee of The Recorder has this report.

My earlier coverage of Monday’s California Supreme Court ruling appears at this link.

“Mayer Brown Not Liable for Losses of Refco Investors, 2nd Circuit Decides; Lawsuit is one of three against the law firm that has been dismissed in the Southern District of New York; another suit is still pending”: Mark Hamblett has this article today in the New York Law Journal.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Second Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Ninth Circuit Nuttiness: A ruling that only plaintiffs attorneys could love.” This editorial appears today in The Wall Street Journal. You can freely access the full text of the editorial via Google News.

“Top court candidates differ on use of presidential power; Elena Kagan seems to have the broadest view, which worries some liberal legal analysts”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Charlie Savage has an article headlined “How Bombing Case Helped Shape Career of a Potential Justice.”

In Monday’s edition of The Washington Post, columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. had an op-ed entitled “The right court fight.”

And at Salon.com, Glenn Greenwald has a blog post titled “Larry Lessig’s ‘case for Kagan’ is the opposite.”

“High court rules with investors in lawsuit against Merck”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

And Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal reports that “Justices Give Boost to Securities Fraud Plaintiffs in Merck Ruling.”