“Same-Sex Vote Unlikely in California”: This article will appear Monday in The New York Times.

“Stuck in the Muddle”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial that begins, “Making sense of the Armed Career Criminal Act’s ‘residual clause’ has become an almost annual rite for the Supreme Court.”

“Why Michiganders have lost faith in judges’ impartiality”: Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has this op-ed today in The Detroit Free Press.

And today in The Lansing State Journal, Dan Pero has an op-ed entitled “Elections are better than ‘merit’ selection of judges; Appointments would shield judges who let political views prevail.”

“Abortion suddenly a hot topic in Harrisburg; A wave of legislation related to it has advocates worried about the possibility of new restrictions”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Disagreement over nominees leaves Virginia Supreme Court shorthanded”: Yesterday’s edition of The Washington Post contained this article.

“Ark Supreme Court justice says clothing ad a surprise, asks designer to stop using her image”: This article appeared Saturday in The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

“Getting a legal grip on violent video games”: Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.

“SJC overturns ’09 conviction”: Today’s edition of The Boston Globe contains an article that begins, “A certificate routinely issued by the Registry of Motor Vehicles cannot be used as evidence in court that individuals have been notified that their license has been suspended or revoked, the state’s highest court ruled yesterday. The Supreme Judicial Court said the introduction of the certificate in a Middlesex County case violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses testifying against him.”

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

“Supreme Court: Decisions to Watch — Walmart, Violent Video Games and More.” Ariane de Vogue has this post at “The Note” blog at ABCNews.com.

“Appellate judge appointed temporary N.J. Supreme Court justice”: The Newark Star-Ledger contains this article today.

“Alabama’s top court overturns law granting grandparents limited visitation rights”: This article appears today in The Birmingham News.

And The Associated Press reports that “High court strikes down grandparents’ rights law.”

When the blog “Alabama Appellate Watch” provides a working link to yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Alabama, I will update this post.

Update: The decision is available in four parts — part one; part two; part three; and part four.

Philadelphia Phillies, on appeal: A Bloomberg News article headlined “FCC Can Force Cable to Share Sports TV: Court” makes mention of the following sentence from a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today:

To use a concrete example, we doubt that Philadelphia baseball fans would switch from cable to an alternative [multichannel video programming distributor] if doing so would mean they could no longer watch Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Roy Oswalt, and Cole Hamels take the mound, even if they thought the alternative MVPD was otherwise superior in terms of price and quality.

Speaking of the Phillies, tomorrow afternoon my son and I will return to Citizens Bank Park to watch Phillies starting pitcher Cliff Lee face Chicago Cubs starting pitcher Matt Garza.

Update: Saturday’s final score was Phillies 7, Cubs 1. You can access the box score by clicking here.

In coverage from The Associated Press of today’s rulings of note from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: An article headlined “Appeals court overturns release of Gitmo detainee” reports on this ruling.

An article headlined “FCC move to close program access loophole upheld” reports on this ruling.

And an article headlined “Court sides with Massey in W.Va. mine appeal” reports on this ruling.

“Pa. appeals court upholds $188M Wal-Mart verdict”: The Associated Press has this report on a 211-page per curiam opinion that a three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania issued today.

“Just In: Katyal Resigning from SG’s Office at End of Supreme Court Term.” Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Court upholds changes to San Diego campaign laws”: The San Diego Union-Tribune has this article reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Verrilli Sworn In as Solicitor General”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

“Microsoft Loses Final Appeal in $290 Million Patent Case”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

The Seattle Times reports today that “Microsoft loses Supreme Court patent battle with tiny firm.”

And The Toronto Globe and Mail contains an article headlined “The new standard for justice in patent law is i4i.”

“Judges in standoff over accused rights in Nova Scotia DNA conviction”: In today’s edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail, Kirk Makin has an article that begins, “A clash between liberal and conservative factions on the Supreme Court of Canada has ended in a robbery conviction for a Nova Scotia man linked to a crime by a single piece of evidence — a Halloween mask. The terse standoff between factions of the court illustrates the growing isolation of judges who tend to favour the rights of the accused.”

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

“Accused sit in jail as military courts drag feet on appeals”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report, along with a related article headlined “After a decade in military prison, innocent man still wants to serve.”

“Supreme Court continues to define what constitutes a ‘violent felony'”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

Today in The New York Times, Adam Liptak reports that “Justices Say Fleeing Police by Car Is a Violent Felony.”

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court weighs in on car chases; The high court rules that ‘vehicular flight’ is a violent felony, punishable by 15 years in prison if it’s a third offense.”

“Santa Cruz files Supreme Court appeal in Nazi salute case; Robert Norse maintains offer to drop case in exchange for loosened rules”: The Santa Cruz Sentinel has this news update.

“You can be fired for using medical marijuana, justices rule; Employers in Washington state are allowed to fire employees who fail a drug test, even if they have valid medical-marijuana authorization, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday”: The Seattle Times has this news update.

And The Associated Press has an article headlined “WA court: Workers can be fired over medical pot.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Washington State consists of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

“Court reinstates New Times lawsuit over late-night arrests”: The Arizona Republic has a news update that begins, “The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday reinstated portions of a federal lawsuit filed by the owners of Phoenix New Times stemming from their late-night arrests by Maricopa County sheriff’s deputies in 2007 after the paper published details of overreaching subpoenas sent to the editors.”

You can access today’s ruling of a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Scalia takes on Congress, a favorite target”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

In commentary available online from Slate: Dahlia Lithwick has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Shooting Pains: Florida’s crazy new law preventing doctors from asking patients about their guns.”

And David Weigel has an essay entitled “Confirmed: The Nomination Process Is Broken — Even Senate Republicans want to help speed up the presidential appointment process” that begins, “Dawn Johnsen doesn’t want to complain. It’s been one year and two months since she withdrew her nomination to lead the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.”

“Federal judge apologizes for misconduct”: This article appears today in The Tulsa World.

“Louisiana nominees for federal bench cruise through Senate hearing”: Bruce Alpert has this article today in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.

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

1. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in DePierre v. United States, No. 09-1533. Justice Antonin Scalia issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership, No.10-290. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a concurring opinion, in which Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. The Chief Justice did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., No. 10-313. Justice Scalia issued a concurring opinion. Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court in Sykes v. United States, No. 09-11311. Justice Thomas issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Scalia issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Kagan issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court says Microsoft must pay in patent case“; “Court: Using car to flee can be considered violent“; “Court says telephone companies must give access“; and “Supreme Court upholds cocaine sentence.”

“Judges Weigh Limits of Health Law’s Powers”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that “Judges Offer Mixed View on Health Law.”

The Washington Times contains an article headlined “Judges seem receptive to health care challenge; See lack of precedent for individual mandate.”

The Omaha World-Herald reports that “Health law hearing pleases Bruning.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Appeals court judges skeptical of government’s health care case.”

At ABCNews.com, Ariane de Vogue has an article headlined “Health Care Law: Appeals Court Seems Skeptical of Obama Administration’s Argument.”

And Politico.com reports that “Panel ponders striking individual mandate.”

“Judge Paul Hawkes files motion to dismiss ‘Taj Mahal’ charges”: Today’s edition of The St. Petersburg Times contains an article that begins, “Judge Paul M. Hawkes says all of his fellow judges at the 1st District Court of Appeal participated in key decisions leading to construction of a posh $50 million courthouse many have dubbed the Taj Mahal. In a motion Wednesday that seeks to dismiss charges against him for conduct unbecoming a judge, Hawkes says the court and its building committee worked in concert to make almost all decisions about the granite- and mahogany-filled building.”

You can access the motion to dismiss at this link, and you can access all of the documents filed in this Judicial Qualification Commission proceeding via this link.

“Court: Dad can paste daughter’s face on porn photo.” Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

You can access yesterday’s ruling of California’s Court of Appeal for the Sixth Appellate District at this link.

“Pennsylvania Supreme Court urged to consider how Philadelphia pays death-penalty lawyers”: The Philadelphia Inquirer contains this article today.

“Sides argue CU regents’ authority in concealed-carry gun ban”: This article appears today in The Denver Post.

The Boulder Daily Camera reports today that “Colorado Supreme Court weighs challenge to CU campus gun ban.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Colo Supreme Court hears arguments on whether universities have right to ban concealed weapons.”

You can access the audio of yesterday’s oral argument in the Supreme Court of Colorado via this link (7.5MB Windows Media audio file).

“Ken Oswalt: Ruling on statutory rape may be hurdle.” Today’s edition of The Newark (Ohio) Advocate contains an article that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled sexual activity between two children younger than 13 without force or impairment cannot be defined as rape.”

Today’s edition of The Columbus Dispatch contains an article headlined “Justices: Kids’ sex was not a crime; Intercourse between boys ages 11 and 12 was consensual.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that “Ohio Supreme Court says statutory rape law unconstitutional when alleged victim and offender are under the age of 13.”

And The Dayton Daily News reports that “Ohio’s statutory rape law declared unconstitutional in some cases.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link. In addition, that court’s Public Information Office issued a news release headlined “‘Statutory Rape’ Law Unconstitutional When Applied to Sexual Conduct Between Two Children Under Age 13; When Use of Force, Impairment of Either Child Not Involved.”