“The Supreme Court, Throwing Curveballs”: In Friday’s edition of The New York Times, Adam Liptak will have this review of law professor Stuart Banner‘s new book, “The Baseball Trust: A History of Baseball’s Antitrust Exemption.”

In the April 2013 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Court weighs whether a prosecutor can use a defendant’s refusal to answer a question.”

David L. Hudson Jr. has an article headlined “More states see tort limits challenged as unconstitutional.”

James Podgers has an article headlined “Trial of Socrates still raises questions about the relationship between citizens and their states.”

And the new installment of Bryan A. Garner’s “On Words” column is titled “What judges really think about the phrase ‘May it please the Court?’”

“NY top court OKs tax on online sellers like Amazon”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the Court of Appeals of New York — that state’s highest court — issued today.

Update: In other coverage, Reuters reports that “New York high court upholds state’s ‘Amazon tax.’”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Amazon, Overstock Lose Challenge to N.Y. Web Sales Tax.”

“Anthony Kennedy Considers Middle Path On Gay Marriage”: Sahil Kapur of TPM DC has this report.

“White House monitoring Guantanamo hunger strike”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this report.

Student’s text-messaging during high school class results in divided Sixth Circuit ruling: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit at this link.

“Study finds class affects Law School experience”: Today’s edition of The Yale Daily News contains an article that begins, “When Yale Law School sends out its coveted admission letters, the nation’s top-ranked law school may not be guaranteeing an equal shot at success for all members of its future classes, a new report has found.”

“Corporations, pro-business nonprofits foot bill for judicial seminars; George Mason University top host of events”: Chris Young, Reity O’Brien, and Andrea Fuller of The Center of Public Integrity have this report today.

And Michael Beckel and Chris Young have a related report headlined “Judicial seminar backed by ex-president of Bolivia; ‘Goni’ accused of human rights violations.”

“Why the Gay-Marriage Fight Is Over”: Online at The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin has this blog post today.

“Justices Cast Doubt on Benefits Ban in U.S. Marriage Law”: Adam Liptak and Peter Baker have this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also contains articles headlined “Plaintiff, 83, Is Calm Center in a Legal and Political Storm” and “Success on Political Front Can Be Setback in Gay Rights.” And an editorial is titled “The Indefensible Marriage Act.”

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Majority of Supreme Court justices question constitutionality of Defense of Marriage Act.” Columnist Dana Milbank has an op-ed titled “The swing vote is in (so stop kissing up).” And columnist Ruth Marcus has an op-ed titled “Supreme Court seems to be inching toward marriage equality.”

David G. Savage and David Lauter of The Los Angeles Times report that “Court seems to be leaning against Defense of Marriage Act; Five justices sound skeptical of the ban on federal benefits for same-sex spouses, a day after a hearing seen as favorable to gay marriage in California.” And a related article is headlined “Outside Supreme Court, activists face off for a second day; As the Supreme Court turns its attention from Proposition 8 to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, demonstrators for and against the law rally outside.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Justices Show Reluctance for Broad Marriage Ruling.” And related articles are headlined “Obama’s Actions Over Law Questioned” and “Widow Gets Day in Court as Justices Weigh Gay Marriage.”

Richard Wolf and Kevin Johnson of USA Today have an article headlined “Justices attack both sides in Defense of Marriage case; Justice Anthony Kennedy’s comments suggest the federal Defense of Marriage Act may be on the way out; But first, the justices must decide if the case is properly before them for a decision.” The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Who wins, who loses if Defense of Marriage Act dies: With the Supreme Court possibly poised to declare the law unconstitutional, the financial, legal and societal impacts are just being sorted out.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has an article headlined “Gay-marriage debate day 2: Supreme Court takes up Defense of Marriage Act.” And a related article reports that “In federal gay-marriage case, more than 1,100 benefits at stake.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Anti-gay marriage law gets chilly reception from key Supreme Court justice; Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is seen as a potential swing vote on DOMA, a gay marriage law that bars federal benefits to same-sex couples; He repeatedly raised concerns in oral arguments Wednesday.”

The Washington Times contains articles headlined “Supreme Court justices question DOMA’s range, consider effect act has in states” and “Obama administration under fire in gay marriage arguments.”

Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an article headlined “Gay marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court: Don’t look for sweeping rulings.”

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “DOMA stirs skepticism among justices.”

The Journal News of White Plains, New York contains an article headlined “Vicki Jackson, attorney arguing gay marriage case, is New Rochelle native.”

Greg Stohr and Laurie Asseo of Bloomberg News report that “Gay-Marriage Backers See Supreme Court Boost Short of Full Win.”

Lawrence Hurley and David Ingram of Reuters report that “Supreme Court indicates it may strike down marriage law.” And Joan Biskupic has a news analysis headlined “High court energizes gay rights cause even as it resists.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has reports headlined “Disappointing wins for gay marriage?“; “Despite critique, Roberts once failed to defend a law“; and “Elena Kagan’s DOMA ‘gotcha’ moment.”

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Todd Ruger has a post titled “Lawyers Reflect on ‘Super Bowl of Supreme Court Arguments.’”

“Comcast wins in class-action lawsuit”: This front page article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Today’s edition of The New York Times reports that “Court Rejects Antitrust Suit in Victory for Comcast.”

Andrew Longstreth of Reuters reports that “Plaintiffs’ bar dodges bullet in Comcast antitrust decision.”

Greg Stohr and Alex Sherman of Bloomberg News report that “Comcast Backed by High Court on Philadelphia Antitrust Suit.”

The Washington Times contains an editorial titled “Reining in class action: The Supreme Court applies a smell test to jackpot justice.”

And online at Forbes, Daniel Fisher has a blog post titled “Class Actions Take Another Hit As Supreme Court Rejects Comcast Antitrust Case.”

“Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Shame of Three Strikes Laws; While Wall Street crooks walk, thousands sit in California prisons for life over crimes as trivial as stealing socks.” Matt Taibbi has this article online at Rolling Stone.

“Top court ruling upholds privacy of e-mail, texts”: Kirk Makin of The Toronto Globe and Mail has this news update.

The Toronto Star has a news update headlined “Supreme Court rules police need wiretap authority to seize text messages; The Supreme Court clarified Wednesday that police need wiretap authority to snoop on cellphone text messages as part of criminal investigations.”

CBC News reports that “Wiretap laws apply to text messages, court rules; Judgment in privacy case overturns lower court ruling against Telus.”

The Canadian Press reports that “Supreme Court rules on police powers for snooping on text messages.”

And Ars Technica has a report headlined “Canadian Supreme Court enforces stricter standards on cops reading text messages; High court says a wiretap warrant, rather than a general warrant, is required.”

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

“Court tosses polo mogul John Goodman’s adoption of girlfriend”: The Palm Beach Post has a news update that begins, “An appellate court has tossed Wellington polo mogul John Goodman’s adoption of his 42-year-old girlfriend as he battled DUI manslaughter charges, issuing the finding in a scathing decision where the justices said Goodman committed a ‘fraud upon the court’ and a senior judge called his actions ‘reprehensible.'”

The South Florida Sun Sentinel has a news update headlined “Goodman can’t adopt 43-year-old girlfriend, court rules; Polo mogul’s bid to adopt grown woman a ‘fraud,’ ruling says.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court reverses Fla. mogul’s adoption of girlfriend.”

And GossipExtra.com reports that “John Goodman’s Adoption of His Girlfriend Tossed Out.”

You can access today’s ruling of Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal at this link.

“‘Crickets’ trip up deputy solicitor general”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this blog post.

“Ditching DOMA: Judging by Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing, the Defense of Marriage Act can’t be defended.” Emily Bazelon has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Gay marriage, voters’ rights and the thorny Prop 8 standing problem”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report.

“Court: Priceline has no fiduciary duty in booking service.” Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“Still Cautious, Supreme Court May Overturn Federal Marriage Law”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”

And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update headlined “Gay marriage in the U.S. Supreme Court: federal law denying benefits to gay couples on shaky ground.”

“Fight over Pendleton Round-Up costume heading to Oregon Supreme Court”: The Oregonian has this report.

“Is the New York Thruway toll discount for residents of Grand Island, New York unconstitutional?” That was the title of a post that appeared here at “How Appealing” on October 15, 2009 reporting on a Second Circuit ruling issued that day. According to my post, the ruling “reinstated, in part, a lawsuit challenging as unconstitutional a toll discount for residents of Grand Island, New York when crossing the Grand Island Bridges.”

On remand, the federal district court once again rejected the plaintiffs’ constitutional challenges to the toll discount. In a per curiam opinion issued today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed the district court’s rejection of the plaintiffs’ right-to-travel and dormant Commerce Clause claims.

Access online the audio from today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307: The Court has posted the audio at this link. And you can access the transcript by clicking here.

“5 Justices Skeptical of Ban on Benefits to Gay Spouses”: Adam Liptak and Peter Baker of The New York Times have this news update.

Robert Barnes and Sandhya Somashekhar of The Washington Post have a news update headlined “Majority of justices question constitutionality of DOMA.”

David G. Savage and David Lauter of The Los Angeles Times have a news update headlined “Liberal justices, Kennedy appear to favor ending part of DOMA.”

Evan Perez, Brent Kendall, and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal have a news update headlined “Justices Ask if Defense of Marriage Case Belongs Before Court; Supreme Court Was Hearing Second Day of Gay-Marriage Debate.”

Richard Wolf and Kevin Johnson of USA Today have a news update headlined “Justices attack both sides in Defense of Marriage case; Justice Anthony Kennedy’s comments suggest the federal Defense of Marriage Act may be on the way out; But first, the justices must decide if the case is properly before them for a decision.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Gay marriage debate day 2: Supreme Court takes on Defense of Marriage law.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court skeptical of federal marriage law.”

Lawrence Hurley and David Ingram of Reuters report that “Supreme Court indicates may strike down marriage law.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. Supreme Court Questions Federal Gay-Marriage Law.”

Politico.com reports that “DOMA on shaky ground in court.”

Ryan J. Reilly and Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post have a report headlined “Supreme Court DOMA Case: Justices Sounded Skeptical Of Law’s Constitutionality, Ongoing Enforcement.”

At TPM DC, Sahil Kapur reports that “Defense Of Marriage Act Takes A Beating At Supreme Court.”

Tom Curry, national affairs writer for NBC News, reports that “Justices signal they might strike down federal marriage law.”

At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Marcia Coyle has a dispatch titled “U.S. Supreme Court Casts Doubt on DOMA.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument recap: DOMA is in trouble.”

“North Dakota governor signs abortion bills”: This article appears today in The Bismarck Tribune.

The Associated Press reports that “ND gears up for legal dispute on new abortion laws.”

And Linda Feldmann of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Why new law makes North Dakota most anti-abortion state: The fetal-heartbeat law, signed by the governor Tuesday, bans abortion as early as six weeks of gestation; North Dakota is also poised to consider a ‘personhood amendment’ to its state constitution, which would ban abortion altogether.”

“CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin Gets Hit In Face With Light Stand After Making First SCOTUS Prediction Since ‘Obamacare'”: Noah Rothman has this post (with video) at “Mediaite.”

“Anthony Lewis ’48, Pulitzer Winner and Crimson Mentor, Dies at 85”: The Harvard Crimson has this report.

And online at The New Republic, Michael Kinsley has an essay titled “Anthony Lewis: The Paul Krugman of His Time — And Then Some.”

“Friend of the Court: How Anthony Lewis Influenced the Justices He Covered.” Richard Tofel has this essay online today at ProPublica.

“5 Justices Seem Skeptical of Defense of Marriage Act”: Adam Liptak and Peter Baker of The New York Times have this news update.

“Legacy and the Supremes: A Psychoanalytic Look at the Court; What role does legacy play in the justices’ decisions?” This audio segment featuring law professor Rick Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — appeared on today’s broadcast of WNYC Radio’s “The Takeaway.”

“Argument recap: Court troubled by tort protections for generic pharmaceutical manufacturers.” Ronald Mann has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Supreme Court conservatives target Obama on marriage law”: Lawrence Hurley and David Ingram of Reuters have an article that begins, “Midway into a second day of tackling the gay marriage issue, conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court said on Wednesday they were troubled by President Barack Obama’s decision in 2011 not to defend in court a ban Congress had approved.”

“The Laughable Argument Against Gay Marriage: The Supreme Court justices will eventually have to reckon with ‘responsible procreation.'” Law professor Jeffrey Rosen has this essay online at The New Republic.

“Knox case could pit extradition treaty against U.S. Constitution”: Terry Baynes of Reuters has this news analysis.

“Red Cross in Guantanamo a week early to check on hunger strikers”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this report.

“Maine Lawyer Credited in Fight for Gay Marriage”: This article will appear in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times. In addition, the newspaper’s “City Room” blog has a post titled “A Marriage Born Where Tables for 2 Women Were Common.”

The Columbia Spectator reports today that “Morningside congressman to travel to D.C. to hear DOMA case.”

And online at The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin has a blog post titled “The Court’s Gay-Marriage Confusion.”