Fear the beard? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued this ruling today.

“Obama Lawyers Say ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Ban Shouldn’t Be Enforced Yet”: Bloomberg News has this report.

At his “Under the Radar” blog at Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has a post titled “Obama administration asks court to lift ban on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ again.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “U.S.: Restore military gay ban now.”

You can access the federal government’s “emergency motion for reconsideration” at this link.

En banc Fourth Circuit issues ruling on qualified immunity and tasers: You can access today’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

The original ruling of a three-judge Fourth Circuit panel on the appeal can be accessed here, while the district court’s summary judgment opinion appears at this link.

“Nixon will let abortion restrictions become law”: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Mo. gov. to let late-term abortion bill become law.”

“Dream Team Assembled at UCI Law School Squeezes Boring Right Out of 2010-11 U.S. Supreme Court Term”: Matt Coker has this blog post at the OC Weekly’s web site.

“California Supreme Court rules in fight over plastic shopping bags”: Denny Walsh of The Sacramento Bee has a news update that begins, “The California Supreme Court this morning ruled that an environmental impact report is not necessary for city and county governments to ban the use of plastic shopping bags.”

Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has a blog post titled “Banning plastic grocery bags just got easier in California.”

And The Associated Press reports that “CA high court OKs Manhattan Beach plastic bag ban.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

“Mistrial declared in Roger Clemens case”: The Washington Post has this news update.

The New York Times has a news update headlined “Clemens Judge Declares Mistrial.”

The Associated Press reports that “Judge declares mistrial in Clemens case.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Clemens Judge Calls Mistrial After U.S. Shows Barred Evidence.”

Reuters reports that “Judge declares mistrial in Clemens perjury case.”

And MLB.com reports that “Clemens’ perjury case declared mistrial; Prosecution shows jury video, text that was ruled inadmissable.”

“Senate Judiciary Committee approves Higginson and Triche-Milazzo judicial nominations”: The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this news update.

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post titled “Committee Backs Judicial Nominees, Including Two for SDNY.”

“Asbestos case hits a snag; Status of judge stalls proceedings”: Today’s edition of The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contains an article that begins, “The Mississippi Supreme Court has stopped all proceedings in an asbestos case that resulted in a record $322 million verdict until a decision is made on whether the trial judge should be removed.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Union Carbide $322 Million Asbestos Verdict Put on Hold.”

“Supreme Court rules against University in Stanford v. Roche”: The Stanford Daily contains this article today.

“Panel discusses Supreme Court’s liberal leanings; At event at UC Irvine, members predict the court will inevitably uphold gay marriage”: This article appears today in The Daily Pilot of Costa Mesa, California.

“A Gun Activist Takes Aim at U.S. Regulatory Power”: Jess Bravin has this article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“2 state judges face US confirmation hearings; Christen, Gleason would be the first Alaska women to serve on the federal bench”: This article appears today in The Anchorage Daily News.

“A Supreme Court Scorecard”: Linda Greenhouse has this post at the “Opinionator” blog of The New York Times.

“Reduced to its essentials, this is nothing more than a dispute, fueled by a disgruntled cheerleader mom, over whether her daughter should have made the squad.” So states the first paragraph of a 24-page opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday.

En banc Fourth Circuit judges disagree over “abuse of discretion” standard in suit alleging that military colleagues violated Army National Guard colonel’s Fourth Amendment rights by intercepting, reading, and forwarding his e-mails while he was deployed in Kuwait: You can access yesterday’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.