“2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate”: Charlie Savage will have this article Saturday in The New York Times.

“Top State Dept. Lawyer Defends Goodwin Liu Nomination”: Mike Scarcella has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

Two against Six: Yesterday’s edition of The Topeka Capital-Journal contained an article headlined “Both Kansas senators will oppose Six” that begins, “Both of Kansas’ United States senators say they will oppose the nomination of a fellow Kansan, former Kansas Attorney General Steve Six, to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.”

And the Kansas City Business Journal reports that “Roberts, Moran won’t back Six’s federal judicial nomination.”

“Judge in Hustler case disallows jury’s $19 million award to Benoit family; Georgia law caps punitive damages unless there is intent to harm”: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a news update that begins, “A jury on Friday voted to penalize Hustler magazine nearly $20 million for publishing nude photographs of wrestler Chris Benoit’s late wife — a verdict overturned by the presiding judge moments later. Instead, the adult magazine will be liable for only $375,000 in compensatory and punitive damages after U.S. District Court Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. ruled the jury could not exceed Georgia’s punitive cap. Richard Decker, hired by Nancy Benoit’s family in 2008 after Hustler published the photos, said he will appeal the judge’s decision.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Judge penalizes Hustler over dead woman’s photos.”

“Illinois Supreme Court rules state cannot take inmate’s money earned from prison job; One justice calls Department of Corrections’ action ‘absurd, unjust'”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune.

And The Associated Press reports that “Ill. high court limits taking prisoners’ savings.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Illinois at this link.

“This case is not, in my view, close. A criminal defendant’s right to a public trial extends to voir dire. Therefore, the intentional, unjustified, and undisclosed closure of an entire voir dire is necessarily a non-trivial structural error that violates the Sixth Amendment and requires reversal. The result in this case is so self-evidently inconsistent with Supreme Court jurisprudence that I would hope that it becomes the subject of certiorari.” So concludes the dissenting opinion that Senior Second Circuit Judge Barrington D. Parker issued today in the case captioned United States v. Gupta.

“Attorney Eugster loses another legal battle”: The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Washington has a report that begins, “Attorney and former Spokane City Council member Steve Eugster lost another legal decision today, this time challenging the way the state elects appellate judges and assigns them to three-judge panels.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Washington State Supreme Court at this link.

“Briana Waters pleads guilty in eco-terror attacks”: Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article that begins, “An Oakland woman has admitted taking part in a radical environmental group’s arson attacks on a University of Washington research center and a Northern California corral, in a plea agreement calling for a four-year prison sentence.”

Meanwhile, in coverage from earlier this week, The Olympian reported that “Former Olympia woman pleads guilty in University of Washington arson.”

And The Seattle Times reported that “California violin teacher pleads guilty to 2001 UW arson.”

My earlier coverage of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in this case from September 2010 can be accessed here.

“Supreme Court rules against longer prison sentences in order to rehabilitate; Supreme Court justices rule 9-0 that federal law does not allow judges to lengthen sentences with the aim of rehabilitating prisoners”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Lansdale woman can challenge terror law in poisoning case”: Today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an article that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Lansdale woman who poisoned her husband’s pregnant paramour can challenge her conviction under a terrorism law that has kept her in prison since 2007.”

“Does Suspect Need Miranda Warning? It May Depend on Age, Justices Rule.” Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

“Justice Kagan stays alert with a little bench humor”: Bill Mears of CNN.com has this report.

“Supreme Court: Children are different when it comes to Miranda warning against self-incrimination.” Robert Barnes will have this article Friday in The Washington Post.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court says age matters in police questioning; On a 5-4 vote, the justices rule that police who remove a student from class for questioning usually must warn him or her of the right to remain silent.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “High Court Expands Juveniles’ Miranda Rights.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has a news update headlined “Supreme Court: Age must be weighed in interrogations.”

The Charlotte Observer has a news update headlined “High court rules against N.C. in juvenile Miranda rights.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Supreme Court: When police question children, their age matters; In the case of a 7th-grader who confessed to break-ins, the Supreme Court ruled that police need to consider a child’s age when deciding when to issue Miranda warnings.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Children’s age and Miranda: The Court, splitting 5-4, rules that police must take a youthful suspect’s age into account in deciding whether they must give ‘Miranda warnings.’”

And online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Read Me a Story, and My Rights: Sonia Sotomayor shows Samuel Alito the value of judicial empathy.”

“Supreme Court OK’s challenge in poisoning case”: The Intelligencer of Doylestown, Pennsylvania has a news update that begins, “A vengeful Lansdale wife who was charged under a law usually reserved for terrorists when she tried to poison her husband’s lover, will be permitted to challenge her conviction, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “States’ rights ruling, a big deal or not? The Court seems to open wide the right of individual citizens to sue to protect the rights of state governments under the Tenth Amendment; But the decision may not actually make the opening so wide.”

“U.S. Appeals Decision Overturning Ban on Corporate Donations to Candidates”: Bloomberg News has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “Feds appeal judge’s ruling on campaign finance law.”

Programming note: This afternoon, I’ll be out of the office for a bit to attend an event in south Philadelphia. Additional posts will appear here later today.

Update: Cliff Lee pitched a two-hit shutout and drove in the game-winning RBI on his second hit of the game to lead the Phillies to a 3-0 victory over the Marlins. You can access the box score at this link and recaps from MLB.com here and here.

Access online today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued five rulings in argued cases today.

1. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Smith v. Bayer Corp., No. 09-1205. The decision is nearly unanimous, in that Justice Clarence Thomas did not join two portions of the opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Tapia v. United States, No. 10-5400. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in J.D.B. v. North Carolina, No. 09-11121. Justice Alito issued a dissenting opinion, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Antonin Scalia and Thomas joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court in Davis v. United States, No. 09-11328. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

5. And Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Bond v. United States, No. 09-1227. Justice Ginsburg issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court says age must be considered in interrogation“; “Court: Woman can challenge use of terrorism law“; “High court upholds Ala. man’s conviction“; “Court lets class action against Bayer proceed“; and “Court says judges can’t give extra time for rehab.”

“Federal court to hear arguments over Bruno retrial; Arguments Friday come after high court’s ruling in honest services case”: This article appears today in The Times Union of Albany, New York.

“Barry Bonds seeks to overturn federal conviction”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

And The Recorder reports that “Bonds’ Appellate Team Seeks Dismissal, Says Slugger Convicted of Being Wordy.”

“N.H. high court: AG need not join care lawsuit.” Today’s edition of The Nashua Telegraph contains an article that begins, “New Hampshire’s highest court gave Attorney General Michael Delaney a slam dunk victory Wednesday, saying he can’t be forced to join a lawsuit against the federal healthcare law.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of New Hampshire at this link.

“Ohio case on courtroom Ten Commandments reaches U.S. Supreme Court”: The Columbus Dispatch contains this article today.

“Gun law misses Pa. Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

“Activists by Invitation”: Linda Greenhouse has this post at the “Opinionator” blog of The New York Times.

“Piercing Cats Is Cruelty, Judges Rule”: John Schwartz has this article today in The New York Times.

The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania reported yesterday that “‘Gothic’ pierced kittens violate Pennsylvania’s cruelty law, court rules; Appeals court upholds conviction of woman who planned to sell ‘gothic cats’ on eBay.”

The Citizens’ Voice of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania reported earlier this week that “Court upholds conviction of gothic-kitten groomer.”

And the blog “Siouxsie Law” has this post.

My earlier coverage of Monday’s Pa. Superior Court ruling appears at this link.

“Can Justice Be Bought?” Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial that begins, “Two years ago, the Supreme Court tried to bolster public trust in the nation’s justice system by disqualifying a state judge in West Virginia from a case that involved a coal company executive who had spent more than $3 million to help get the judge elected.”

“In ‘Doo-Wop’ Case, 3rd Circuit to Consider ‘Prevailing Party’ Fees Issue”: Shannon P. Duffy of The Legal Intelligencer had this article in September 2010 about the Third Circuit‘s grant of rehearing en banc in that case.

Yesterday, the en banc Third Circuit issued this ruling in the matter.

“Cap on jury awards a legal limit, state Supreme Court told; But opponent in tort reform test says law restricts judicial powers”: This article appears today in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi.

And the newspaper also contains an op-ed by columnist Sid Salter entitled “Court decision on tort reform will impact elections.”

“Barry Bonds Asks Court for New Trial or Acquittal on Obstruction Charge”: Bloomberg News has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “Barry Bonds asks for acquittal or new trial.”

“Lawmakers Propose Warrant Requirement for GPS Data”: David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“For Whom the Post-Judgment Motion Tolls: Avoiding a Trap in Federal Court.” Yesterdays edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers, contained this month’s installment of my “Upon Further Review” column.

My column this month focuses on a ruling from a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that I first noted in a post that you can access here.

“Prop. 8 challenge to gay judge’s ruling rejected”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan reports that “Gay judge wasn’t required to remove himself from same-sex marriage case, U.S. judge rules; Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who has been in a long-term relationship, last year ruled that the Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage in California was unconstitutional; The new ruling establishes that gay judges may decide gay rights cases without having to defend their impartiality.”

Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reports that “Judge rejects bid to set aside Proposition 8 ruling.”

And The New York Times reports that “California Judge Upholds a Ruling on Gay Marriage.”

“Convictions upheld in ‘massive’ mortgage fraud scheme”: Bill Rankin has this article today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

You can access here and here yesterday’s rulings of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

“Skip The Legalese And Keep It Short, Justices Say”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on Monday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Sandra Day O’Connor keynotes WSU forum; Speakers seek alternate routes to choose Michigan Supreme Court justices”: The South End, the student newspaper of Wayne State University, has this report.

“A California Bankruptcy Court Rejects U.S. Law Barring Same-Sex Marriage”: John Schwartz has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Bankruptcy court blasts Defense of Marriage Act.”

And Carol J. Williams of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Defense of Marriage Act called unconstitutional by bankruptcy judge; Ruling is first to address the issue since the Obama administration announced it would no longer defend the law.”