“FBI: Glitches, Not Cyberattack, Disrupted Court Websites; Technical Problem Prevented Lawyers from Filing Documents, Reading Case Files.” The Wall Street Journal has this report.

You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

“Ruling against housing exemption for clergy headed for appeal”: The Wisconsin State Journal has an article that begins, “The federal government filed notice Friday that it will appeal a federal judge’s ruling that a law allowing clergy members to avoid paying income taxes on salary designated as a housing allowance was unconstitutional.”

“Online attack cripples U.S. court system”: Brian Fung has this entry at “The Switch” blog of The Washington Post.

And The Washington Times reports that “Cyber attack hits federal judiciary websites, filing systems.”

“Supreme Court says nuns are exempt for now from Obamacare contraceptives rule”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court blocks contraceptives rule for religious groups.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “High court grants exemption from birth control mandate; The challenge by religious organizations that don’t want to be involved in birth control coverage is separate from another brought by for-profit businesses, which the high court will hear this spring.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Obamacare: Supreme Court hands nuns temporary victory on contraceptives; The Supreme Court blocked enforcement of Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate and said the nuns were not required to use the procedure set up by the government as an accommodation for religious groups.”

Josh Gerstein and Jennifer Haberkorn of Politico.com report that “Supreme Court grants temporary reprieve from contraceptive mandate.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Charity gets win for now over Obamacare on contraception.”

At “The Note” blog of ABC News, Ariane de Vogue has a post titled “Supreme Court Allows Nuns to Opt Out of Contraceptive Mandate for Now.”

And The Hill has a blog post titled “Court hands nuns a temporary win on birth control mandate.”

“Colorado Supreme Court risks bias charge with $3,200 Broncos banners”: The Denver Post has this news update.

“At 25 Years and 26 Days, Chief Justice Hecht Marks History as Longest-Serving Justice”: The Supreme Court of Texas today issued a news release that begins, “Texas’ longest-serving appellate judge, Chief Justice Nathan L. Hecht, celebrates a new milestone Sunday: longest-serving justice in state Supreme Court history.”

Third Circuit grants plaintiffs’ petition for permission to appeal in case challenging the lawfulness of GSK’s diversity re-removals of state court Paxil personal injury cases more than one year after the cases were filed in state court: This afternoon, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit entered an order granting my clients’ petition for permission to appeal in a case presenting the question “Whether a defendant may remove a case a second time based on diversity jurisdiction more than one year after the commencement of the case?”

Also available online, in addition to my clients’ petition for permission to appeal, are GSK’s answer in opposition and my clients’ motion for leave to file a reply (with reply attached). In addition to granting permission to appeal, today’s Third Circuit order also permitted my client’s reply. Earlier posts reporting on the case can be accessed here, here, and here.

As a result of today’s order, the appeal will now proceed to a decision on the merits following full briefing and, should the Third Circuit desire it, oral argument.

“Court system hit with cyberattack”: Tony Romm of Politico.com has a report that begins, “Unidentified hackers took aim at the federal court system Friday, blocking access to its public website while preventing lawyers and litigants from filing legal documents online.”

I am pleased to report that the uscourts.gov web site appears to be back online at this time.

“Justices Extend Order Blocking Contraception Mandate for Nuns”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

Say what you will about Gmail’s reliability, but what’s up with “Uscourts.gov is DOWN for everyone”? The current outage of the uscourts.gov domain may impede this blog’s timely coverage of federal appellate court developments for the remainder of the outage.

“Partial win for Little Sisters”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

You can access this afternoon’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.

Update: In other coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court gives nuns a compromise on health care issue.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Nuns get partial win in Supreme Court contraception fight.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Nuns Don’t Need to Fill Out Obama Contraceptive Form, Court Says.”

“Superfund offers model for child porn restitution — Obama admin”: Jeremy P. Jacobs of Greenwire has this report.

“Appeals Court Won’t Rehear Fox’s Attempt to Stop Dish’s ‘Hopper’ Ad-Skipper”: At the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner has this post reporting on an order and amended opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

“Iowa Supreme Court will review HIV criminalization case”: Grant Rodgers of The Des Moines Register has this news update.

“Gay rights and judges: A thumb on the scales.” This post appears today at the “Democracy in America” blog of The Economist.

“Sandra Day O’Connor to open new Stockton College lecture series”: The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger has this report.

A news release that the college issued last week can be viewed at this link.

“Lawyer Fighting Chevron Hires a Heavy for Appeal”: Jennifer Smith has this post at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog.”

“More Mischief from Judge Reinhardt”: Ed Whelan has this post today at National Review Online’s “Bench Memos” blog.

“As best the record showed, Enmund was a schmo hired to drive the getaway car for a robbery gone wrong”: A longtime reader of this blog has emailed to observe that Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski‘s use of the word “schmo” in an opinion concurring in part issued yesterday appears to be the first use of that word in a published U.S. Court of Appeals ruling.

The schmo in question, according to Chief Judge Kozinski, was the petitioner in Enmund v. Florida. For the record, it appears that Enmund’s first name was Earl, not Joe.

A Westlaw search reveals that “schmo” has appeared more than a handful of times in federal district court opinions and in the appellate rulings of various state courts.

“Little Sisters: A further order, or not?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

D.C. Circuit allows federal death row inmate to intervene in lawsuit challenging the federal government’s method of carrying out lethal injections and its failure to disclose its execution procedures: You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.

FindLaw’s “Technologist” blog recommends “50 Twitter Accounts Lawyers Should Follow Religiously”: At the risk of offending the quasi-constitutional separation of church and Twitter, you can find that blog’s recommendations in two posts, here (part one) and here (part two).

The “How Appealing” blog’s Twitter feed somehow managed to sneak in under the wire as a fan favorite on part two of the list.

“Marotta plans to appeal court’s sperm donor decision; Marotta ‘almost’ ready to go to jail rather than pay back child care payments”: Steve Fry has this front page article today in The Topeka Capital-Journal.

“Google will appeal German court ruling on orgy pix”: The Associated Press has this report.

Reuters reports that “German court orders Google to block Max Mosley sex pictures.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Google to Block 6 Photos Showing Mosley Sex Party.”

And in local coverage, Die Welt reports that “Google darf Sex-Fotos von Max Mosley nicht anzeigen.” The newspaper previewed today’s ruling in an article headlined “Google furchtet um seinen wertvollen Suchindex.”

Earlier, Der Spiegel reported on the case in an article (available in English) headlined “Man versus Machine: Max Mosley’s Battle against Google Hits the Courts.”

“Pa. Supreme Court Says Drug Companies Can Be Sued For Marketing Dangerous Drugs”: A LexisNexis litigation blog has posted online this report from Mealey’s.

And Dan Packel of Law360 reports that “Pa. Pharma Ruling Opens New Front In Mass Tort Battles” (subscription required for full access).

My earlier coverage of Tuesday’s Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling, in a case in which I served as appellate counsel for plaintiff, can be accessed here and here.

“Alabama would avoid federal elections supervision under new bill; Congress debates renewing part of Voting Rights Act that U.S. Supreme Court tossed”: Mary Orndorff Troyan has this front page article in today’s edition of The Montgomery Advertiser.

“Herring sparks clash on gay marriage”: This front page article appears today in The Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch.

“Iowa justices weigh whether defamation suit victory stifles political speech”: Grant Rodgers has this article today in The Des Moines Register.

And The Quad-City Times of Davenport, Iowa reports that “Political ad grabs attention of Iowa’s top court.”

“Bill seeks at least 35 years for young killers”: Today’s edition of The Boston Globe contains an article that begins, “A group of state lawmakers is proposing legislation that would require juvenile murderers to serve at least 35 years in prison before being eligible for parole, in direct response to a Supreme Judicial Court ruling that struck down life sentences without the possibility of parole for young killers.”

“Conservatives’ sentencing law gets a grilling at Supreme Court hearing”: Sean Fine has this article today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.

“Sotomayor to law students: ‘You give me hope.'” The GW Hatchet has this report.