“Justices Clash on Affirmative Action”: Jess Bravin has this article today in The Wall Street Journal.
The Washington Times reports today that “Supreme Court weighs race-based college admissions in Texas case.”
The Daily Texan reports that “Controversial affirmative action court case makes its way to Supreme Court.”
Joan Biskupic of Reuters has a news analysis headlined “Justice Kennedy the key to campus affirmative action.”
The Columbia Spectator reports that “Supreme Court hears arguments in affirmative action case; If the Court rules that affirmative action is unconstitutional–a real possibility, considering its composition–the decision would take effect immediately at Columbia and other institutions.”
Online at The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin has a blog post titled “At the Supreme Court, a Timid Defense.”
At Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has a blog post titled “Alito speaks up for Asian Americans.”
And at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Lyle Denniston has a post titled “A looming threat to affirmative action.”
“Affirmative Action at Colleges Questioned by High Court”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.
The Austin American-Statesman has a news update headlined “Supreme Court grills UT, plaintiff on use of race in admissions.”
The Houston Chronicle has news updates headlined “Supreme Court hears arguments on UT race case” and “Sweatt’s family hears arguments in Supreme Court race-based admission case.”
Todd J. Gillman of The Dallas Morning News has an update headlined “Supreme Court hears arguments over use of race in deciding University of Texas admissions.”
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Supreme Court: In affirmative action arguments, conservative bloc seems united; The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday on an affirmative-action plan at the University of Texas, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, the likely swing vote, appeared skeptical.”
The Texas Tribune reports that “Justices Take Aim at Key Question in UT-Austin Case.”
This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment featuring Nina Totenberg entitled “Court Questions University’s Affirmative Action Plan.”
And online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a Supreme Court dispatch entitled “Between a Quota and a Hard Place: Is the Supreme Court ready to end affirmative action?”
“Supreme Court to Rule on Patents for Self-Replicating Products”: David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.
“Justice Ginsburg Throws Party While 120-Year-Old Parents Away For Weekend”: The Onion has this report.
“Supreme Court showdown on affirmative action”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this report.
“Stored Communications Act Doesn’t Reach Opened Webmails”: At the “E-Commerce & Tech Law Blog” of Bloomberg BNA, Thomas O’Toole has a post that begins, “The South Carolina Supreme Court held today that opened email messages on a web-based email service provider are not protected by the federal Stored Communications Act.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of South Carolina at this link. Although all five justices agreed with the result, the decision does not contain a majority opinion.
Update: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “South Carolina Supreme Court Creates Split With Ninth Circuit on Privacy in Stored E-Mails — and Divides 2-2-1 on the Rationale.”
“A Changed Court Revisits Affirmative Action in College Admissions”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court divided over affirmative action in college admissions.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court justices skeptical of affirmative action for college.”
Richard Wolf and Mary Beth Marklein of USA Today have a news update headlined “Supreme Court weighs quotas in affirmative action case.”
Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court conservatives press affirmative action supporters to defend racial preferences.”
And Terry Baynes of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court justices challenge Texas university race policy.”
You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 11-345.
“U.S. court clears South Carolina voter ID law for 2013”: David Ingram and Harriet McLeod of Reuters have this report on today’s ruling of a three-judge court of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
“Top patent court to reconsider validity of financial software patents; Original ruling ‘failed to follow the Supreme Court’s instructions'”: Timothy B. Lee has this blog post at Ars Technica.
You can access yesterday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granting rehearing en banc at this link.
“Argument recap: Will Grutter be reshaped?” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“High court questions Texas affirmative action plan”: The Associated Press has this report.
And at WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog, you can access coverage of the oral argument at this link.
“Appeals court reinstates campaign finance limits”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated Montana’s campaign donation limits, telling the federal judge who overturned it to outline his full reasoning so the panel can review the case.”
You can access yesterday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Halftime report at Fisher Oral Argument”: Kevin Russell has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“What would Obama’s Supreme Court look like?” Liz Goodwin has this post today at “The Ticket” blog of Yahoo! News.
“High court to hear biggest race case in six years”: Tom Curry, NBC News national affairs writer, has this report.
“Justices Return To Affirmative Action In Higher Ed”: This audio segment featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”
“The Bingo Act’s restrictions on the use of bingo proceeds for political advocacy are permissible conditions on a government subsidy and do not operate to penalize speech.” So ruled a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit yesterday in a First Amendment challenge to limitations imposed under the Texas Bingo Enabling Act on how charities may use bingo proceeds.
“The Hidden Stakes of the Election”: Today at the blog of The New York Review of Books, law professor Cass R. Sunstein has a post that begins, “It is not exactly news that there are big differences between judges chosen by Republican presidents and judges chosen by Democratic presidents. Of course the most visible differences involve constitutional law.”
“Eyes on Justice Kennedy in Affirmative-Action Case”: Jess Bravin will have this article Wednesday in The Wall Street Journal.
“Feds seek full court review of cigarette warnings”: The Associated Press has this report.
And Bloomberg News reports that “FDA Seeks Reconsideration of U.S. Cigarette Label Ruling.”
You can view the FDA’s petition for rehearing en banc at this link.
Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire is reporting: In coverage of today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List, he has articles headlined “Justices steer clear of Chevron’s $18B Ecuadorean pollution judgment” and “Justices won’t hear Ala. Superfund dispute.”
“Race and College Admissions, Facing a New Test by Justices”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.
In Wednesday’s edition of USA Today, Richard Wolf will have an article headlined “Supreme Court to weigh in again on affirmative action.”
Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Supreme Court case on use of race in admissions could be landmark; The University of Texas at Austin admits some students based on a process that includes race as one factor — even though the school is already racially diverse; The Supreme Court will consider whether that process is justified.” And Stacy Teicher Khadaroo has an article headlined “Supreme Court: If affirmative action is banned, what happens at colleges? Nine states have tried to achieve campus diversity through other means, with mixed results; On Wednesday, the Supreme Court takes up an affirmative action case from the University of Texas at Austin.”
Ariane de Vogue of ABC News reports that “Supreme Court to Hear Case Brought by White Student Who Claims Race Cost Her Admission to UT.”
The San Antonio Express-News has an update headlined “Supreme Court to hear case against UT’s race-conscious admissions.”
Terry Baynes of Reuters has a report headlined “Preview: Is Supreme Court set to end use of race in admissions?”
This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “Supreme Court To Take Up Affirmative Action Case“; “At U. Of Texas, A Melting Pot Not Fully Blended“; and “How Does Affirmative Action Impact Colleges?”
At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument preview: Is affirmative action about to end?”
At WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog, Jess Bravin and Sara Murray have a post titled “Romney Stays Away From Affirmative Action Case.”
In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, Lee C. Bollinger and Claude M. Steele have an op-ed entitled “A high-stakes battle for higher education: The Supreme Court should recognize that we all benefit from affirmative action in college admissions.”
At the “Defining Ideas” site of the Hoover Institution, law professor Richard A. Epstein has an essay entitled “The Affirmative Action Quagmire: Rather than place restrictions on race-based preferences, the Supreme Court should let colleges run themselves.”
Online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Rage or Justice: The complicated emotions behind the Supreme Court’s upcoming argument on affirmative action.”
And online at The Atlantic, Andrew Cohen has an essay entitled “How Affirmative Action Shaped the Current Supreme Court: Tomorrow’s case may put an end to the policy at U.S. universities; But its personal impact on the careers of several of the justices could hardly be more pronounced.”
“Federal Circuit: Congress can’t renege on pay promises to judges.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report.
Programming note: Additional posts will not appear here until this evening.
Once the U.S. Supreme Court posts its Order List online shortly after 9:30 a.m. eastern time today, you can access it via this link. And you can access timely coverage of the Order List from “SCOTUSblog.”
“Justices Face a Test on Race; A University of Texas Admissions Policy Aims to Help High-Scoring Minorities”: Jess Bravin will have this article Tuesday in The Wall Street Journal.
“Jeffrey Toobin: Don’t Expect ‘New’ Or ‘Moderate’ John Roberts After Health Care Ruling.” TPM DC has this report.
“High court looks at race in college admissions”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.
“Plaintiffs assail Va. public-records law on 2 fronts”: Tony Mauro has this report online at the First Amendment Center.
“Supreme Court to take up UT admission case”: This article will appear Monday in The Houston Chronicle.
“Supreme Court receives outpouring of conflicting views on affirmative action”: Robert Barnes will have this article Monday in The Washington Post.
“Supreme Court candidates with similar passions stress their differences; Longtime attorney Sheryl Gordon McCloud and former Justice Richard Sanders are battling for an open seat on the state Supreme Court; McCloud says she has the right judicial temperament for the job, while Sanders says he has more experience”: Friday’s edition of The Seattle Times contained this article.
“Georgia high court may weigh in on ‘Girls Gone Wild’ case”: This article appeared Thursday in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
And a related article from Atlanta’s WSB-TV Action News 2 is headlined “Woman takes case against Girls Gone Wild to Supreme Court.”
“Major victory — and pay raises — for U.S. judges”: Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”
My earlier coverage of Friday’s en banc Federal Circuit ruling appears at this link.
“California has chance to change Three Strikes, repeal death penalty”: Tracey Kaplan and Howard Mintz have this article today in The San Jose Mercury News.
“Super sweet letter from Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Supreme Court Judge extraordinaire!” Chef Kyle Bailey of the restaurant Birch & Barley has this tweet and accompanying photograph.
