The State of Virginia had filed a petition in the United States Supreme Court seeking review of the decision striking down Virginia's spam statute and seeking to reinstate the conviction of Jeremy Jaynes.  The Virginia Supreme Court struck down Virginia's spam statute because it did not exclude non-commercial speech.  The statute was clearly overbroad.  (The question was whether Jaynes could challenge the overbreadth since he was engaged in commercial speech.)

The Supreme Court today turned down that appeal [via How Appealing] [pdf].  Jaynes's conviction has no chance of being reinstated.  I'm not sure about the fate of the statute.  I heard they were on the path to amending it anyway to address the non-commercial speech issue.

Previous posts collected at this link, along with my bad prediction that the Court would take up the case:

("Beating the Dead First Amendment Horse, Not Quite"); ("Va High Court Hears Free Speech Challenge to Spam Law"); ("VA to Revisit Rejection of First Amendment Challenge to Criminal Spam Law"); ("Va Supreme Ct.: Spam Law Violates First Amendment"); ("Trouble Stomaching the Virgina Supreme Court's Spam Decision") 

Look on the bright side.  Jaynes is celebrating.  I'm sure his lawyers are, they did a great job obtaining reconsideration of the initial ruling.  [Definite illustration of how you should not necessarily sit back after an adverse ruling.  The reconsideration seemed like a long shot but it saved the day.]  I should also acknowledge that Tom O'Toole at BNA's TechLaw blog correctly predicted this.  Not that he didn't have the odds in his favor or anything!

Effect on spam laws elsewhere?  Probably none.  Most spam laws cover only commercial speech.  I don't think I've come across another spam statute which suffers from this flaw.