“Florida legislature forbids use of foreign law in state court”: Reuters has a report that begins, “Florida legislators voted to forbid use of foreign law in state courts on Wednesday, despite arguments that the measure was a cheap shot intended to insult Muslims.”

“Supreme Court dilemma: Is a smartphone a home away from home?”
Michael P. McGough has this essay online today at The Los Angeles Times.

“EPA’s Supreme Court win a boost for pending carbon rules”: Valerie Volcovici of Reuters has a report that begins, “A Supreme Court decision on Tuesday upholding U.S. rules that curb air pollution that floats across state lines was seen as a boost for the Environmental Protection Agency’s upcoming plan to crack down on carbon emissions from power plants.”

“Arguments in the tour guide free speech lawsuit against New Orleans unfolded in appeals court on Wednesday”: The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this report on an appeal argued today before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

You can access the audio of today’s oral argument in Kagan v. City of New Orleans via this link (30.5 MB mp3 audio file). Although the Fifth Circuit has its headquarters in New Orleans, this case was argued today in Houston.

“Microscope and Telescope”: Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Limelight Patent Case Mires U.S. High Court in Procedure”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. high court conflicted over Limelight Networks patent fight.”

In Thursday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Brent Kendall will have an article headlined “Akamai-Limelight Patent Case Goes Before Top Court; Justices Consider Whether to Make It Easier to Hold Companies Liable for Encouraging Infringement by Others.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

At “Patently-O,” Dennis Crouch has a post titled “Supreme Court Takes-On Question of Joint Infringement.”

Online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “When Can You Steal an Idea?”

And earlier, today’s edition of The Boston Globe contains an article headlined “Akamai patent case before Supreme Court.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., No. 12-786.

“When the Death Penalty Turns Into Torture: Oklahoma’s botched execution was the grim but predictable result of a state more concerned with vengeance than justice.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Botched execution offers new evidence to attorneys”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Divided Pa. Supreme Court OKs warrantless searches of cars”: Matt Miller of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has this report.

Yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consisted of an opinion announcing the judgment of the court, a concurring opinion, and a dissenting opinion.

“Scalia gets his facts wrong in EPA dissent”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“A History of Supreme Court Snark: Roberts and Sotomayor sniped at each other last week, but earlier Courts saw far worse.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online today at The Atlantic.

“How Oklahoma Botched an Execution: Clayton Lockett’s lethal injection suffered a problem more fundamental than the drugs.” Ben Crair has this essay online today at The New Republic.

“A ‘view’ from the Court: The Ginsburg-Scalia show.” Mark Walsh has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Former Justice Stevens: Campaign cash isn’t speech.” The Associated Press has this report.

Update: C-SPAN has posted online a video titled “Justice Stevens Senate Testimony.”

“New suit targets Ohio gay marriage ban; A group of gay and lesbian couples in Ohio hope to make the state the next where a ban on same-sex marriage is found unconstitutional”: The Cincinnati Enquirer has this report.

“Exorcising the voter fraud ghost”: Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this essay online today at Reuters.

“How Oklahoma’s Botched Execution Affects the Death-Penalty Debate: State officials used untested drugs from a secret source to end the life of Clayton Lockett, who took more than 45 minutes to die.” Andrew Cohen has this essay online today at The Atlantic.

“Federal appeals court upholds mandatory retirement age of 70 for Pennsylvania judges”: The Associated Press has this report on a non-precedential ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued yesterday. It is interesting to note that the Third Circuit panel had not even requested oral argument of the appeal.

“Our Cellphones Are Us: The Supreme Court tries to reconcile the Fourth Amendment with the realities of our tech age.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Republican group will focus on judicial races”: Reid Wilson has this entry at the “GovBeat” blog of The Washington Post.

“To Kill? Or Not to Kill? As executions decline in Texas, a small-town prosecutor decides whether to seek the death penalty.” Maurice Chammah has this lengthy article online at The Texas Observer.

“Eyewitness account: A minute-by-minute look at what happened during Clayton Lockett’s execution.” Ziva Branstetter of The Tulsa World has this report, along with an article headlined “Execution botched before inmate dies of heart attack; second execution postponed.”

And today’s edition of The Oklahoman contains a front page article headlined “Botched lethal injection prompts closer look; Oklahoma Corrections Department officials stopped the execution of Clayton Derrell Lockett just before 6:30 p.m. Tuesday after a botched lethal injection that caused Lockett’s body to violently convulse on the table; He died of a heart attack about 40 minutes later.”

“Where Yinz At: Why Pennsylvania is the most linguistically rich state in the country.” Matthew J.X. Malady has this essay online at Slate.

“Nagging [federal district] judges to act on motions under advisement is not essential to preserving one’s rights.” So observes Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook in an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“9th Circuit Finds Flaws in Robbery Conviction”: Courthouse News Service has this report on a 6-to-5 en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

“Prisoner suing for conjugal visits with his wives; Pa. court says corrections officials must provide more evidence to justify policy against conjugal visits”: Peter Hall will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania.

You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Inmate dies after botched execution; second execution stayed; According to a Corrections Department spokesman, all three drugs had been administered, but they did not have the desired effect”: The Oklahoman has a news update that begins, “State Corrections Department officials stopped the execution of an inmate Tuesday after a botched lethal injection. Corrections Department Director Robert Patton later addressed members of the media, and announced after a blown vein, Lockett suffered a heart attack at 7:06 p.m., and was declared dead.”

The Tulsa World has a news update headlined “Execution botched before inmate dies of heart attack; second execution postponed” that begins, “The execution of convicted killer Clayton Lockett was botched tonight at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary before he died of a massive heart attack. The event prompted officials to postpone a second execution scheduled for two hours later.”

Erik Eckholm of The New York Times has a news update headlined “Oklahoma Stays Second Execution After First Is Botched.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Man dies of heart attack after botched execution.”

“Why can’t SCOTUSblog get a credential? It’s surprisingly hard to find out — and the journalists making the rules are as open as Chick-fil-A on Sunday.” Jonathan Peters has this lengthy post today at the “Behind the News” blog of Columbia Journalism Review.

On a related note, this blog’s helpful “Chick-fil-A” pronunciation guide can be accessed here (hint: it rhymes with “Sunday”).

“Strange benchfellows, Ginsburg and Scalia star in U.S. courtroom drama”: Joan Biskupic of Reuters has this report.

“Oklahoma Set for Double Execution Amid Storm Over Lethal-Drug Secrecy”: Erik Eckholm of The New York Times has this news update.

“Ex-Supreme Court Justice Hathaway won’t see early release from prison”: The Detroit News has an update that begins, “Former state Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway lost her bid Tuesday to pop out of ‘Camp Cupcake’ early.”

“In 9-0 vote, Supreme Court makes it easier to get fees in patent cases; Top patent court almost never makes bad actors pay; Supremes see it differently”: Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has this report.

And Diane Bartz of Reuters reports that “U.S. high court takes up case involving ambiguous patents.”

“Justices Seem Torn on Cellphone Warrants”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Justices split on whether police can search cellphones during arrests.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Justices search for compromise on cellphone privacy.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Supreme Court Is Wary of Warrantless Cellphone Searches.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

Josh Gerstein and Tal Kopan of Politico.com report that “Justices appear open to limits on cellphone searches.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Court seemingly at odds over cell phones and searches.”

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “Initial impressions from the oral argument in the Supreme Court cell phone search cases.”

“Justices consider no-warrant cellphone searches”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Police Phone Searches Draw Privacy Concerns at High Court.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. justices weigh limits to police cell phone searches.”

At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Tony Mauro has a post titled “Justices Skeptical of Broad Power to Search Phones.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument analysis: Limiting a search? Sure, but how?”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Riley v. California, No. 13-132. And you can access at this link the transcript of today’s oral argument in United States v. Wurie, No. 13-212.

In today’s mail: I received a copy of William Domnarski’s new book, “Swimming in Deep Water: Lawyers, Judges, and Our Troubled Legal Profession.”

At his “Hercules and the Umpire” blog, Senior U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf recently had a post about the book titled “A beautiful book for the briefcase.”

And the “Legal Writing Prof Blog” earlier this month had a post titled “A new book raises provocative points about legal writing.”