“Wave of Appeals Expected to Turn the Tide on Same-Sex Marriage Bans”: Erik Eckholm will have this news analysis in Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.

“In re: National Security Letter, Under Seal v. Holder.” On Thursday, the Ninth Circuit posted online the redacted briefs that Electronic Frontier Foundation filed in that court last month in two national security letter-related challenges. You can access the briefs here and here.

“Crying Wolf on Religious Liberty”: The Sunday Review section of tomorrow’s edition of The New York Times will contain an editorial that begins, “This week, the owners of two secular, for-profit corporations will ask the Supreme Court to take a radical turn and allow them to impose their religious views on their employees — by refusing to permit them contraceptive coverage as required under the Affordable Care Act.”

“Canada’s Supreme Court has rejected its new member. Here’s how this changes Canada’s constitutional debate.” Erin Crandall has this lengthy and informative entry today at “The Monkey Cage” blog of The Washington Post.

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling appears at this link.

“Anti-abortion activist loses appeal over Ohio home raid”: Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Appeals court issues temporary stay in Michigan’s gay marriage case”: The Detroit News has this update.

The Detroit Free Press has news updates headlined “Appellate court reverses course, issues temporary stay on same-sex marriages until Wednesday“; “Ruling could push Michigan gay marriages into legal limbo“; and “Gay Michigan couples’ wedding-day joy turns to uncertainty when state halts same-sex marriages.”

The New York Times has a news update headlined “Tumultuous Day for Gay Couples in Michigan.”

Reuters reports that “Ruling to strike down Michigan gay marriage ban put on hold.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court halts gay marriages in Michigan.”

You can view this evening’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit at this link.

“Schuette’s request for stay in gay marriage decision remains pending”: The Detroit News has this update, along with an update headlined “Michigan same-sex couples making marriage history with joy, tears.”

And The Detroit Free Press has a news update headlined “Michigan’s first gay marriage performed in Ingham County; couples line up in Oakland.”

“Appeals Court Upholds Current Fees on Debit Card Purchases”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Brent Kendall, Ryan Tracy, and Robin Sidel have an article headlined “Court Revives Fed Rule Limiting Debit-Card Fees; Decision Is a Setback for Retailers, Who Argued the Fed Didn’t Do Enough to Curb Bank Levies.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Fed Upheld on Debit Card Swipe-Fee Cap by Appeals Court.”

Reuters reports that “Appeals court upholds Fed’s debit card ‘swipe fee’ limits.”

And The Associated Press reports that “US appeals court upholds Fed’s cap on ‘swipe’ fees.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.

“Having paid 3 lawyers ‘is sanction enough'”: John Bursch had this post yesterday at Warner Norcross & Judd LLP’s “One Court of Justice Blog.”

“Argument preview: Crowd control — or message control?” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

And Tom P. Taylor of Bloomberg BNA has a blog post titled “Supreme Court Preview: Bush’s Decision to Dine Al Fresco Sparks Secret Service Fiasco.”

“The Supreme Court should reverse the Ninth Circuit and uphold Slaughter-House!” Randy Barnett has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Supreme Sunshine: Shining a Light on the High Court.” You can view the video of yesterday’s event at this link.

“Judicial Fact Finding Ron Amok: Judge Posner’s Judicial Fashion Shows.” Josh Blackman had this post yesterday at his blog.

“Are Firms Entitled to Religious Protections? Hobby Lobby’s founder objects to the health law, but the government says for-profit companies aren’t entitled to religious-freedom protections.” Janet Adamy has this front page article today in The Wall Street Journal.

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Washington Bureau has an article headlined “Faith and health care law to collide at Supreme Court.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com has an article headlined “Justices to hear ‘Hobby Lobby’ case on Obamacare birth control rule.”

Stuart Taylor Jr. reports that “Justices To Weigh Contraceptive Mandate Against Religious Freedom Claims.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument preview: Religion, rights, and the workplace.”

Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project has a report titled “Health Care Law’s ‘Contraception Mandate’ Reaches the Supreme Court.”

Yesterday’s broadcast of the PBS program “Religion & Ethics Newsweekly” had a video segment titled “Contraception Mandate.”

Pema Levy of Newsweek has reports headlined “When Is a Mandate Not a Mandate? Ask the Supreme Court” and “It’s About Birth Control, Stupid.”

msnbc has reports headlined “The law that could sink birth control coverage” and “Nuns take sides as contraception fight heads to the Supreme Court.”

The Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster (Pa.) New Era has articles headlined “Reluctant litigants: Hahn family takes its pro-life stance, and Conestoga Wood Specialities, to the Supreme Court” and “Praying for the Hahns: How Christians are uniting behind Conestoga Wood Specialties owners in Obamacare fight.”

Dmitriy Shapiro of Washington Jewish Week reports that “Jewish groups on both sides of Hobby Lobby.”

At the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Scott Bomboy has a post titled “Could Citizens United and a semi-colon undo Obamacare?”

Reuters Breakingviews columnist Reynolds Holding has an essay titled “U.S. company religion case on Obamacare may shake shareholder faith.”

At The Daily Beast, Jay Michaelson has an essay titled “Do Corporations Believe in God? The ‘Hobby Lobby’ Case Has the Answer.” And Tiffany Stanley has an essay titled “Why Can’t the FDA Fix Outdated Birth Control Labels? Contraceptives like Plan B don’t prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in a woman’s body; But their labels still say they do — and they’ve become a tool for conservative activists.”

Online at Mother Jones, Stephanie Mencimer has an essay titled “Are You There God? It’s Me, Hobby Lobby; Everything you need to know about the high-stakes religious-freedom case that could redefine corporate personhood.”

Wharton professor Amy Sepinwall has an op-ed in The Washington Post titled “Can a corporation have a conscience?”

Online at Reason, Damon Root has a post titled “Contraceptives, Corporations, and Obamacare: Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. reaches the Supreme Court.”

At National Review Online’s “Bench Memos” blog, Ed Whelan has a round-up of his earlier relevant blog posts titled “Selected Posts on Hobby Lobby.”

And the American Constitution Society recently held a briefing on the cases, and you can view the video via this link.