Howard Bashman rounds up the stories here and here. See also this Supreme Court dispatch by Dahlia Lithwick at Slate. I’m not sure which line is more interesting: Stephen Henderson’s: ” Most oral arguments at the high court end ambiguously, with the justices leaving small hints about how they’ll resolve tricky legal dilemmas. But once in a while, there are arguments where the only lingering question seems to be who’ll write an opinion that reaches an obvious conclusion.” or Dahlia Lithwick’s: “But as the justices seem mostly to agree today, it’s not certainly not illogical to assume that if that cute freshman from your Russian-lit class already told you she didn’t want to go on a date with you, it’s a pretty safe bet she doesn’t want to have sex with you, either.” As I have said, this seems like one of those cases that the Court took for error correction purposes rather than to make any grand changes in the law.