“Aaron Swartz Protesters Take Over Government Websites, Install Asteroids“: Will Oremus has this post at Slate’s “Future Tense” blog. According to that blog post, “the hackers [have] moved on to a different government website: that of the U.S. Probation Office for the Eastern District of Michigan.”

“HLS Professor Files DOMA Amicus Brief”: This article appears today in The Harvard Crimson.

“Bond v. United States and the Treaty Power Debate”: Law professor Curtis Bradley has this post at the “Lawfare” blog.

“Constitution Check: What are the limits on the president’s appointment powers?” Lyle Denniston has this post at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Down the Rabbit Hole: A Review of Errol Morris’s A Wilderness of Error: The Trials of Jeffrey MacDonald.” Rodger Citron has this review at Justia’s Verdict.

“Sister’s former Senate office chief of staff set to testify against Pa. Justice Joan Melvin”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Anonymous re-hacks US Sentencing site into video game Asteroids; The U.S. Sentencing Commission website has been hacked a second time; A code distributed by Anonymous ‘Operation Last Resort’ turns ussc.gov into a game of Asteroids”: ZDNet has this report, along with an article headlined “Torvalds slams prosecutor for Swartz’s suicide.”

The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Aaron Swartz and Motel Caswell: Book ends to prosecutorial reform? A judge this week dismissed a drug forfeiture case involving a motel owner; The prosecutor, US Attorney Carmen Ortiz, is also facing criticism for her role in the prosecution of Internet hacker Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide earlier this month.”

In Saturday’s edition of The San Francisco Chronicle, law professor Pamela Samuelson had an op-ed titled “Aaron Swartz: Opening access to knowledge.”

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “Aaron’s Law, Drafting the Best Limits of the CFAA, And A Reader Poll on A Few Examples.”

“Lawyers Behaving Badly Get A Dressing Down From Civility Cops; Adversarial System Grows Obscenely Nasty; ‘Get More Results With Sugar'”: Jennifer Smith has this front page article today in The Wall Street Journal.

“Sotomayor’s secrets of success: Work hard, dare to dream.” The San Diego Union-Tribune has this news update.

Available online from National Public Radio: This evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained audio segments titled “The Senate And Its Finicky Filibuster Relationship” and “‘Manifest Injustice’: A 40-Year Fight For Freedom.”

And yesterday’s broadcast of “Weekend Edition Saturday” contained an audio segment titled “Prosecuting Socrates All Over Again.”

“Can the President Appoint Principal Executive Officers Without a Senate Confirmation Vote?” Law professor Matthew C. Stephenson has this essay in the January 2013 issue of The Yale Law Journal.

The essay begins, “A widespread, seemingly unquestioned assumption regarding the process for appointing federal officers is that the Constitution requires the Senate to vote to confirm the President’s nominee before the appointee may take office on a permanent basis. This Essay challenges that assumption by arguing that as a matter of constitutional text, structure, and history, it is not at all clear that the Senate must affirmatively vote in favor of a nominee in order to provide the required advice and consent.”

“How Newegg crushed the ‘shopping cart’ patent and saved online retail; It’s game over for a patent troll that sued nearly 50 big retailers”: At Ars Technica, Joe Mullin has this interesting article reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued last Tuesday.

“Permitting Legislative Repeal by Blocking Nominations: The DC Circuit Recess Appointment Disaster.” Law professor Peter M. Shane has this blog entry at The Huffington Post.

“John Roberts bankrupts law students; The Supreme Court justice is paid thousands to ‘teach’ in Europe — and his law students are footing the bill”: Law professor Paul Campos has this essay at Salon.com.

“Fed computers hijacked in Swartz tribute”: This article appears today in The Boston Herald.

The Washington Times reports today that “Hackers take over federal website, threatens ‘war’ on U.S. government.”

The New York Post reports that “Hacking is ‘Reddit revenge.’”

The Independent (UK) reports that “Anonymous hacks US government agency website after Aaron Swartz suicide.”

Edward Moyer of c|net has a report headlined “In Swartz protest, Anon hacks U.S. site, threatens leaks; Saying ‘a line was crossed’ with the treatment of tech activist Aaron Swartz, the group hacks a government site related to the justice system and distributes encrypted files it says it will decrypt unless demands are met.”

At the “Bits” blog of The New York Times, Nick Bilton has a post titled “Disruptions: A Fuzzy and Shifting Line Between Hacker and Criminal.”

And Friday online at The Telegraph (UK), Brendan O’Neill had a blog post titled “Only one person is responsible for Aaron Swartz’s death, and that is Aaron Swartz.”

“Yet More G.O.P. Obstruction”: Friday at the “Taking Note” blog of The New York Times, Lincoln Caplan had a post that begins, “In his first term, President Obama tried to fill two vacancies on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.”

“Retrial begins in D.C. case that prompted Supreme Court GPS ruling”: Yesterday’s edition of The Washington Times contained this article.

And yesterday’s edition of The Washington Post contained an article headlined “Accused drug dealer, representing himself, hears prosecutors open their case.”

“Judicial elections lead to distrust of the courts”: This editorial appeared yesterday in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“GOP Senator Says Labor, Consumer Finance Rulings May Be Invalid”: Tom Schoenberg of Bloomberg News has a report that begins, “Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, said hundreds of U.S. labor rulings may be invalid due to a court decision that found President Barack Obama’s appointments to the National Labor Relations Board are unconstitutional.”

“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Nation marks 40th anniversary of Roe.” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.

“Lawyers in gay marriage cases aim pitches at Obama”: Joan Biskupic of Reuters has this report.

“Forty years later, Roe v. Wade still divides”: In today’s edition of The Kansas City Star, Brad Cooper has a front page article that begins, “The number of abortions performed in America has been on the decline for a generation. Yet in few states has the trend been more dramatic in recent years than in Kansas, a change driven by a series of laws limiting the procedure and by the violent death of the state’s most prominent abortion doctor in 2009.”

“Alabama Supreme Court mostly reverses jury awards for plaintiffs — or rules in private”: The Huntsville Times has this report.

“Gay marriage opponents take unusual tack with Supreme Court; Lawyers defending the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Prop. 8 argue that marriage should be limited to opposite-sex unions because they alone can ‘produce unplanned and unintended offspring'”; David G. Savage will have this article Sunday in The Los Angeles Times.

“How Congress Should Fix Personal Jurisdiction”: Law professor Stephen E. Sachs has posted this paper online at SSRN.

“Who Decides the Laws of War?” Charlie Savage will have this news analysis in the Sunday Review section of tomorrow’s edition of The New York Times.

“Focus on Preserving Heritage Can Limit Foster Care for Indians”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

The article notes that the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978’s “interpretation has been tested in a case that will be heard by the United States Supreme Court this year and is being watched closely by child welfare experts.”

“U.S. Supreme Court should not decide federal same-sex marriage ban yet, Harvard professor argues”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has this report.

“Will Obama the Constitutional Lawyer Please Stand Up?” David K. Shipler will have this article in the February 11, 2013 issue of The Nation.

“Gitmo prosecutor’s rejected memo released”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this blog post.

The Telegraph (UK) reports that “September 11 trial threatened by legal dispute; The trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has been thrown into turmoil by a legal dispute that could hand the alleged mastermind of the September 11 attacks and his alleged co-conspirators strong grounds for appeal.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Guantanamo and the Court: Next round.”

And at the “Lawfare” blog, Alan Rozenshtein has a post titled “Military Commission Prosecutor’s Filings Regarding 9/11 Conspiracy Charges.”

“US Sentencing Commission site down, Anonymous claims responsibility; Group says it will release information on Supreme Court Justices if reforms aren’t made”: Ars Technica has this report.

My related coverage from earlier today appears at this link.

“For Sotomayor, Bronx School’s Closing Prompts Heartache — and Memories”: This post appeared yesterday at the “City Room” blog of The New York Times.

“A Flood of Suits Fights Coverage of Birth Control”: In Sunday’s edition of The New York Times, Ethan Bronner will have an article that begins, “In a flood of lawsuits, Roman Catholics, evangelicals and Mennonites are challenging a provision in the new health care law that requires employers to cover birth control in employee health plans — a high-stakes clash between religious freedom and health care access that appears headed to the Supreme Court.”

“Obama’s recess appointments bet sours”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this report.

Today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an article headlined “Court Throws Out Recess Picks; Long Tradition of Presidential Appointments During Senate Breaks Faces Constitutional Challenge.” The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Obama’s Abuse of Power: An appeals court says his recess appointments are unconstitutional.”

And today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial titled “A Court Upholds Republican Chicanery.”

“Suit against Austria’s railroad gets new shot”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle reporting on an order granting rehearing en banc that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

The original three-judge panel’s 2-to-1 ruling in the case failed to produce a majority opinion.