“State supreme court to hear alienation of affection suit”: Yesterday’s edition of The Rapid City Journal contained an article that begins, “The South Dakota Supreme Court has agreed to hear a man’s claim that the Pennington County state’s attorney’s actions violated a rarely invoked law leading to the breakup of his marriage.”

“Congress’ new terrorism rules leave open questions”: Pete Yost of The Associated Press has this report.

“Courthouse dedication set for Monday; Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Sen. Richard Shelby expected to speak”: The Tuscaloosa News today contains an article that begins, “A grand opening and dedication ceremony will be held Monday morning at the Tuscaloosa Federal Building and Courthouse.”

You can view images of the new federal building and courthouse, along with related news coverage, here, here, and here.

“Analysis: Deficit may be biggest threat to healthcare reforms.” Reuters has a report that begins, “A mounting U.S. deficit could pose a much greater threat to the survival of President Barack Obama’s healthcare reforms than either the Supreme Court or 2012 elections.”

“Ending race-based admissions”: Columnist Jeff Jacoby has this op-ed today in The Boston Globe.

“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Arizona, Texas and healthcare reform.” UPI has an article that begins, “The challenge to Arizona’s stringent illegal alien law accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court last week is just the tip of the spear in the much larger battle over federalism, which pits the rights of the states against the steady concentration of federal power. Two other high-profile cases accepted by the Supreme Court this term, the challenge to the U.S. healthcare reform law and the fight over redistricting in Texas, also fit squarely into the federalism paradigm.”

“Supreme Court’s 2012 Decisions Could Sway Presidential Election”: Law professor Adam Winkler has this essay online at The Daily Beast.

“Kentucky Supreme Court to hear Amish appeals”: The Louisville Courier-Journal today contains an article that begins, “The Kentucky Supreme Court has agreed to hear the appeals of nine Amish men who were convicted in Graves County for refusing on religious grounds to use a bright orange-red safety triangle on their horse-drawn buggies.”

“Justice Joan Orie Melvin’s sister faces four additional charges”: Today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review contains an article that begins, “Allegheny County prosecutors filed new corruption charges on Friday against a sister of state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin and painted a picture of a judicial office immersed in partisan politics for almost two decades.”

And today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contains an article headlined “New charges filed against Janine Orie; Justice Melvin’s staff offers testimony.” The newspaper has also posted online the grand jury presentment and the criminal complaint.

“Brief filed against Forsyth appeal on prayer”: The Winston-Salem Journal has an article that begins, “Attorneys for two women who sued Forsyth County over sectarian prayers at county commissioners’ meetings are asking the U.S. Supreme Court not to consider the county’s appeal of a lower-court ruling that bans such prayers.”

“Republicans block recess appointments”: Politico.com has this report.

“Newt Gingrich says he’d defy Supreme Court rulings he opposed”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Newt Gingrich’s assault on ‘activist judges’ draws criticism, even from right.”

The New York Times has a blog post titled “Gingrich Looks to Make ‘Activist’ Judges an Issue.”

McClatchy Newspapers report that “Gingrich rails at courts, suggests ignoring rulings.”

The Washington Times has a news update headlined “Gingrich expands call to reel in federal courts.”

And The Hill reports that “Gingrich ramps up objections to judicial branch’s power.”

“Illegal immigrants have no right to arms — court”: Terry Baynes of Reuters has this report.

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

“Appeals court backs off ‘boy’ ruling”: Today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Bill Rankin has an article that begins, “The federal appeals court in Atlanta has backed off a controversial ruling issued a year ago that threw out a race discrimination verdict in favor of an African-American poultry worker who had been called ‘boy’ by his white supervisor at a Tyson Foods plant.”

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

“Judge mulls overturning federal marriage law”: Reuters has a report that begins, “A U.S. judge appeared sympathetic to a lesbian federal employee’s bid to strike down a law denying health-insurance benefits to her spouse, in the first hearing since the Obama administration decided to quit defending the statute.”

The Associated Press reports that “Lesbian federal worker gets assist from DOJ lawyer.”

And at Metro Weekly, Chris Geidner has a blog post titled “Golinski Has Her Day in Court, DOJ Sends Senior Lawyer To Argue DOMA’s Unconstitutionality.”

“Bonds gets one month house arrest for obstruction”: Will Kane and Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle have a news update that begins, “A federal judge said today that baseball slugger Barry Bonds must serve 30 days house arrest for obstructing justice during a federal investigation into his alleged use of steroids.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Judge gives Bonds house arrest, then delays it.”

“Court sides with unions in airline dispute”: Reuters has a report that begins, “A U.S. appeals court ruled on Friday that a hotly disputed change in federal labor law making it easier for unions to organize is lawful.”

My earlier coverage of today’s D.C. Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Georgia, Alabama ask appeals court to stay proceedings on immigration law”: This article appears today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“Senate Confirms Nomination of Morgan Christen to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals”: The Public Information Office of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued this news release.

“Bonds to be sentenced for obstruction of justice”: The Associated Press has this report.

Bloomberg News reports that “Barry Bonds Judge Didn’t Jail Two Other Athletes in Sport-Drugs Probe.”

Lance Williams of The San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday that “Judge could send Barry Bonds to jail Friday.”

And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News reported yesterday that “Judge set to sentence Barry Bonds on Friday.”

A majority of those eligible to vote or merely a majority of those actually voting? A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued this decision today in a case involving statutory construction of the Railway Labor Act.

In agreement with the Fifth Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit holds that illegal aliens do not possess any Second Amendment rights: You can access today’s one-paragraph, per curiam Eighth Circuit ruling at this link.

“We consider whether federal courts possess exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction over state-based legal malpractice claims that require the application of federal patent law.” So begins an interesting majority opinion that the Supreme Court of Texas issued today.

The case was decided by a 5-to-3 vote, with one justice recused. You can access the dissenting opinion at this link. The dissent argues that the two Federal Circuit rulings that the majority decided to follow, and a Fifth Circuit ruling that adhered to those two Federal Circuit rulings, “represent a novel method of determining federal question jurisdiction, and one which this Court should not adopt.”

You can access the briefs filed in the case via this link.

“Voting Rights Controversies Wreak Havoc in Texas”: Ariane de Vogue of ABC News has this blog post.

“Computer-Crime Statute Gets Ninth Circuit Workout”: Ginny LaRoe of The Recorder has a report (subscription required) that begins, “Toss together Alex Kozinski and an untested computer-crime statute, and you can imagine the result. At oral arguments before an 11-judge panel on Thursday, the Ninth Circuit chief judge repeatedly challenged the Justice Department’s position on the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act — a position that could lead to the criminalization of seemingly innocuous computer activity, like providing false information on Facebook or Match.com in violation of terms of use agreements or using work computers in violation of employer policies.”

You can access via this link the audio of yesterday’s oral argument before an 11-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in United States v. Nosal.

“Hearsay is not a breach of human rights says Council of Europe”: This article appears today in The Independent (UK).

The Guardian (UK) contains articles headlined “European court backs British judges over hearsay evidence; European court of human rights upholds British doctor’s indecent assault conviction in landmark ruling“; “Time for the UK supreme court to think again on hearsay; Once again, the European court of human rights has protected a right apparently better understood abroad than at home“; and “At last, Strasbourg heeds our supreme court; Today’s al-Khawaja judgment shows the European Court of Human Rights is listening to UK judges.”

The Telegraph (UK) reports that “Gangster wins human rights pay out but UK still scores victory; A gangster has been awarded £15,000 after European judges ruled evidence used to convict him breached his human rights.”

The Daily Mail (UK) reports that “UK wins in European human rights court as judge rules hearsay evidence can be used in criminal trials.”

BBC News reports that “Hearsay evidence backed by human rights judges; Hearsay evidence in a trial does not automatically breach a defendant’s human rights, EU judges have ruled.”

And the “UK Human Rights Blog” has a post titled “Use of hearsay evidence does not automatically prevent a fair trial, rules Strasbourg.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the European Court of Human Rights at this link.

“High Court Spotlight on Right to ‘Credit Bid'”: Law professor Stephen J. Lubben has this post at the “Dealbook” blog of The New York Times.

“Justice Gableman not charged legal fees in ethics case; Justice’s arrangement with firm raises questions about cases, ethics rules”: In today’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Patrick Marley has an article that begins, “State Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman received free legal service worth thousands of dollars from one of Wisconsin’s largest law firms as it defended him against an ethics charge, according to a letter released Thursday by the firm.”

“New book gives behind-the-scenes look at colorful high court”: Bill Mears of CNN.com has this report.

“High-Profile Cases Fill Supreme Court’s Docket”: This 30-minute audio segment featuring David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Talk of the Nation.”

“Justice Margaret H. Marshall to Teach at HLS; Former Massachusetts Supreme Court Chief Justice to join HLS faculty”: This article appears today in The Harvard Crimson.

Yesterday, Harvard Law School issued a news release headlined “Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall will join HLS faculty.”

“Medical Mind Control: A new breed of patent may determine how your doctor makes decisions.” Timothy Lee has this essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court to mess with Texas”: Politico.com has this report.

“Ruling upholds Lower Merion schools in redistricting suit”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains this article reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued on Wednesday.

And at the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post titled “Appeals Court Upholds Race-Conscious Student Assignment Plan.”

“In letters from prison, Komisarjevsky says he may be ‘beyond redemption'”: This article appears today in The New Haven Register.