In a year when Democrats are struggling to energize supporters, Hispanic voters appear significantly less motivated than the rest of the U.S. to cast election ballots even though two-thirds of Latino registered voters say they'll vote Democratic in their congressional race, a Pew Hispanic Center study found.

The center's national survey, released Tuesday, found 51 percent of Latino registered voters were absolutely certain they would vote — compared with 70 percent of U.S. voters — and 65 percent of Latino voters planned to support the Democrat in their congressional district, compared with 47 percent of U.S. voters.

They are pledging that support even though only 26 percent of the voters said the policies of President Barack Obama's administration have helped Latinos. Thirteen percent said the administration's policies hurt Latinos, while 51 percent said they had no effect.

"The Latino vote appears to continue to strongly identify with the Democratic Party," said Mark Lope, Pew Hispanic Center's associate director.

A 51 percent Latino voter turnout would be a slight increase in turnout over 2008. But midterm turnout for all voters generally is lower than in presidential years. In 2006, about 32 percent of eligible Latino voters showed up at the polls.

Pittsburgh-based Reed Smith, which has 150 lawyers in Philadelphia, is in early merger discussions with Dallas-based law firm Thompson & Knight, both firms confirmed Friday to the Pittsburgh Business Times.

"We are in preliminary merger discussions with Texas-based Thompson & Knight," said Reed Smith Managing Partner Greg Jordan in an e-mail. “The discussions are preliminary and no final agreement or partner vote has been reached or taken.”

Reed Smith has more than 1,500 lawyers, while Thompson & Knight has about 350 lawyers with a focus on the energy industry, including oil and gas, Jordan said.

Becky Jackson, chief client services officer at Thompson & Knight, offered the following statement in an e-mail:

“In today’s legal environment, Thompson & Knight’s historical presence in Texas and our outstanding energy expertise are sought after by firms. For several years, we have regularly received inquiries regarding possible mergers. We have had preliminary conversations with Reed Smith, and they are obviously a great firm, but it is premature to characterize these discussions in any detail.”

Under Jordan’s decade-long tenure, Reed Smith has grown from a Pittsburgh-centric 500-lawyer firm to an international firm three times the size through a series of major mergers and acquisitions. In 2001, the firm acquired 60-lawyer Warner Cranston of London. In January 2003, it acquired California’s 220-lawyer Crosby Heafey Roach & May. In 2007, the firm merged London’s 250-lawyer Richards Butler and 140-lawyer Sachnoff & Weaver of Chicago. And in January 2008, Reed Smith acquired 110-lawyer Richards Butler Hong Kong and 55 lawyers from New York’s Anderson Kill & Olick.

The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from a father and son who built Adelphia Communications into a cable television powerhouse and were convicted of fraud after it collapsed into bankruptcy.

The high court refused on Monday to hear an appeal from John and Timothy Rigas.

The Rigases were sent to prison after Adelphia collapsed in 2002. At the time, it was the country's fifth-largest cable TV company.

Prosecutors said John Rigas used it like a personal piggy bank, paying for expenses as small as massages and withdrawing $100,000 from the company whenever he wished.

The Rigases say the government should have turned over to them notes taken during prosecutorial interviews with some witnesses. They also say their prison sentences were too long.

The Supreme Court is starting its new term with a new justice, Elena Kagan, and bad news for hundreds of parties trying to get their cases heard at the nation's highest court.

The justices are expected to start work Monday by denying many of the nearly 2,000 appeals that piled up in recent months. The court also is hearing argument in a bankruptcy dispute and an appeal by criminal defendants seeking shorter prison terms.

During the new term, the court will look at provocative anti-gay protests at military funerals and a California law banning the sale of violent video games to children. These cases worry free speech advocates, who fear the court could limit First Amendment freedoms.

The funeral protest lawsuit, over signs praising American war deaths, "is one of those cases that tests our commitment to the First Amendment," said Steven Shapiro, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Another case involves a different aspect of the First Amendment, the government's relationship to religion. The justices will decide whether Arizona's income tax credit scholarship program, in essence, directs state money to religious schools in violation of the constitutional separation of church and state.

Under Chief Justice John Roberts, marking his fifth anniversary on the court, and with the replacement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor by Justice Samuel Alito, the court has been more sympathetic to arguments that blur the line between government and religion, as long as one religion is not favored over another.

The Supreme Court won't decide who really owns the initials "SC" when it comes to college sports: the University of Southern California or the University of South Carolina.

The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from South Carolina, which wanted to trademark a baseball cap logo with the initials "SC."

The Trojans already have a trademark on a version of "SC" and say the Gamecocks' symbol looks too much like theirs. The California school says it has sold tens of millions of dollars of apparel with "SC" on it, while South Carolina only wanted to start using those initials on baseball caps in 1997.

Courts have rejected South Carolina's trademark.

The case is University of South Carolina v. University of Southern California, 09-1270.

A federal appeals court has declined to fast-track a challenge against a Minnesota law requiring disclosure of corporate political spending.

In an order Monday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion to expedite the case, and it scheduled oral arguments for Jan. 11 in St. Louis, well after the election.

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the Taxpayers League of Minnesota and a travel company are trying to overturn the law on free-speech grounds.

U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank last month refused to block the state law.

The groups have also asked the 8th Circuit for an injunction to suspend enforcement of the disclosure law while their appeal is considered. The appeals court took that request under advisement.