“California Supreme Court chief justice gives insight on state government to students”: The Daily Californian has this report.

“Second hearing called on Supreme Court nominee”: The Honolulu Star-Advertiser has a news update that begins, “The state Senate Judiciary and Labor Committee will hold another hearing on Circuit Judge Michael Wilson’s nomination to the state Supreme Court on Saturday after more detailed questions have been raised about his fitness to serve.”

And Pacific Business News reports that “Hawaii Supreme Court nominee Michael Wilson to get another hearing.”

“Google Points Out That Even The Copyright Office Thinks Judge Kozinski’s ‘Innocence Of Muslims’ Ruling Is Wrong”: Mike Masnick has this post today at “techdirt.”

“Actelion loses court bid to toss damage award”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.

“Cranky Posner opinion mocks brief, suggests sending lawyer to jail”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

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

“Florida Supreme Court throws out 2003 damage caps, centerpiece of Bush reforms”: The Miami Herald has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Fla. Supreme Court tosses medical malpractice caps.”

You can access today’s 5-to-2 ruling of the Supreme Court of Florida, on certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, at this link.

“In drought-stricken California, court rules smelt fish get water”: Dan Levine of Reuters has this report on a ruling that a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

And in other coverage, Jeremy P. Jacobs of Greenwire reports that “Judges uphold federal protection for fish in dispute over Calif. water management.”

“‘Innocence of Muslims’ Battle: Copyright Registration Denied, Facebook Weighing In; The latest developments after an appeals court decided that actress Cindy Lee Garcia could assert a copyright interest in her performance.” Eriq Gardner has this post today at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

My posts from last night linking to yesterday’s rehearing-related filings in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit can be accessed here and here.

In recent adult entertainment-related news from the Ninth Circuit: Somehow it managed to elude my attention until today that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments last week in two appeals that this blog has occasionally covered.

Last Tuesday’s edition of The Los Angeles Daily News contained an article headlined “Porn industry argues appeal of Los Angeles condom law.”

XBIZ Newswire reported last Tuesday that “9th Circuit Hears Vivid’s Measure B Appeal.”

And MintPress News reports today that “L.A. Law Requiring Condoms On Adult Movie Sets Faces Key Court Test; Could a federal appeals court put a wrap on Measure B, a law requiring condom use on all adult film sets in Los Angeles County?”

On Monday of last week, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel heard oral argument in Vivid Entertainment v. Fielding. You can access the oral argument audio via this link. The three-judge panel assigned to the case consists of Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber, and U.S. District Judge Jack Zouhary of the Northern District of Ohio sitting by designation.

Two days later, on Wednesday of last week, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel heard oral argument in United States v. Ira Isaacs. XBIZ Newswire reported last Wednesday that “9th Circuit Hears Ira Isaacs’ Obscenity Conviction Appeal.”

And Mark Kernes of AVN News reported last Wednesday that “Ninth Circuit Panel Hears Ira Isaacs Obscenity Appeal.” (Caution: This AVN News link may contain ad images that may be not safe for work.)

The three-judge panel assigned to the Isaacs appeal consists of Circuit Judges Graber and Mary H. Murguia and Senior Circuit Judge Ferdinand F. Fernandez. You can access the audio of this oral argument via this link.

“Court tosses out sentence for Austin killer”: Chuck Lindell has this front page article today in The Austin American-Statesman. According to the article, “Maxwell was 17 at the time of the shooting, and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that his automatic sentence of life without parole violated the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment when applied to defendants who were under the age of 18 at the time of the crime.”

Yesterday’s 5-to-4 ruling of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas — that state’s highest court in criminal cases — consisted of a majority opinion and two dissenting opinions (here and here).

And in somewhat related news from Ohio, The Cincinnati Enquirer today contains an article headlined “Ohio Supreme Court: Reconsider juvenile murder sentence.”

You can access yesterday’s 5-to-2 ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link. The court’s public information office also issued this summary of the ruling.

“Hawaii bar explains reasons for Supreme Court nominee’s ‘unqualified rating'”: Pacific Business News has this report.

“Standing by Her Story: Anita Hill Is Celebrated in the Documentary ‘Anita.'” Sheryl Gay Stolberg will have this article in Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.

And in The Los Angeles Times, Robin Abcarian has an essay titled “Clarence Thomas vs Anita Hill: A new film opens old wounds.”

“U.S. Supreme Court Shoots Down Street Artists’ Rights Case”: Newsweek has this report.

“Supreme Court won’t block ban on guns’ high-capacity magazines”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.

“Nina Totenberg shares wisdom, jokes from decades of covering U.S. Supreme Court”: This article appears today in The Columbia Missourian.