“The Early Jurisprudence of Justice Sotomayor: Sonia Sotomayor’s first five years on the Court.” The Yale Law Journal Forum today has posted this online symposium.

Access online the supplemental authority letters filed following last week’s Third Circuit oral argument in United States v. Auernheimer: The federal government’s letter, filed last Thursday, can be accessed here.

And the defendant/appellant’s response, filed today, can be accessed here.

“U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Health Trust suit”: Mark Guydish of The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania has this news update.

Unless the losing parties seek review in the International Court of Justice at The Hague, it would now appear that my client’s appellate victory in this case is secure.

In this earlier post reporting on the Pa. Supreme Court‘s denial of review in the case, I linked to my client’s appellate filings. The U.S. Supreme Court‘s docket entries in the case can be accessed here.

Update: In other coverage, The Citizens’ Voice of Wilkes-Barre reports that “Supreme Court tosses Pittston, Dallas petition against health trust.”

“Supreme Court Declines to Revive Delaware Arbitration Program; Lower Courts Held That Allowing Sitting Judges to Rule in Private Proceedings Was Unconstitutional”: Brent Kendall and Peg Brickley will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Health-Law Contraceptive Case Skews Ideological Lines on High Court; Conservatives Cite Legal Doctrine Written by Late Liberal Champion Brennan”: Jess Bravin will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

And Jennifer Haberkorn of Politico.com reports that “Contraception coverage heads to SCOTUS.”

“‘No Plans to Change’ High Court Access Policies”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

“Conservatives defend Marc Nadon, slam Supreme Court’s timing; Justice Minister Peter MacKay says the government, ‘surprised’ by the court’s rejection of its appointment of Nadon, is reviewing its options”: The Toronto Star has this report.

“Baton Rouge’s definition of ‘family’ weighed by Louisiana Supreme Court”: The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this news update.

“Sandra Day O’Connor tells Stockton audience of her road to the Supreme Court”: The Atlantic City Press has this news update.

“Contraception Ruling Could Have Reach Far Beyond Women’s Rights”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Online at The New Republic, Tom Donnelly has an essay titled “Can Liberals Trust John Roberts to Rescue Obamacare Again? A pro-Hobby Lobby ruling would be his most radical decision.”

And at Salon.com, Brian Beutler has an essay titled “Right-wing judges face huge moral dilemma: How Hobby Lobby could expose SCOTUS’ hypocrisy; The coming case will test what’s more sacred to this court: Corporate imperatives or so-called religious liberties.”

“The Religious Right’s Failed Gay-Marriage Backlash: In states like Arizona, social conservatives hoped to push back against the rising gay-rights tide, but lawmakers and the public sided against them.” Molly Ball has this essay online at The Atlantic.

In jurisprudence essays available online at Slate: Naomi Lamoreaux and William Novak have an essay titled “Getting the History Right: Tracking the real history of corporate rights in American constitutional thought.”

And Margaux J. Hall has an essay titled “Who’s the Boss? Why are our employers making our health insurance choices in the first place?”

“Sacred and Profane: Where the Waco siege went wrong.” Malcolm Gladwell has this Annals of Religion article in the March 31, 2014 issue of The New Yorker.

“Humor and Other Rarities Emerge in a Case About Lying”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“US Supreme Court rejects Del. appeal on secret panel”: Sean O’Sullivan of The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware has this update.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Delaware Court Arbitrations Blocked as Appeal Rejected.”

Tom Hals of Reuters reports that “Delaware loses final bid to revive ‘secret courts.’”

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has a blog post titled “SCOTUS lets court access ruling stand.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Arbitration with public spectators? Maybe . . .”

In the April 2014 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Low-tech high court to weigh police search of smartphones.”

Lorelei Laird has an article headlined “SCOTUS ruling could complicate laws on impaired driving.”

And the new installment of Bryan A. Garner’s “On Words” column is headlined “Ax these terms from your legal writing.”

Programming note: Due to a late-morning meeting with trial counsel in an appeal I will be working on, additional posts will not appear here until mid-afternoon.

“Everything You Need To Know About The Supreme Court Taking On Birth Control”: Sahil Kapur of TPM DC has this report today.

And at “ThinkProgress,” Ian Millhiser has a post titled “Read This One Document To Understand What The Christian Right Hopes To Gain From Hobby Lobby.”

“Supreme Court Preview: Do IRA’s Experience Life After Death?” Tom P. Taylor of Bloomberg BNA has this blog post on the case scheduled for oral argument this morning at the U.S. Supreme Court.

And last week at “SCOTUSblog,” Ronald Mann had a post titled “Argument preview: Scope of protections for retirement funds in bankruptcy squarely at issue.”

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted today’s Order List at this link. The Court granted review in one case, and the Court called for the views of the Solicitor General in two cases.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Justices deny Del. court appeal over secrecy” and “Supreme Court declines to hear sex registry case.”

“White House weighs next nuclear option”: Edward-Isaac Dovere of Politico.com today has a report that begins, “Pressure is continuing to mount in President Barack Obama’s base — and within his own White House — to push for a new nuclear option for judicial nominees.”

“Religious case at Supreme Court could affect Obamacare and much more; The Supreme Court will hear Hobby Lobby’s religious liberty challenge to Obamacare on Tuesday; Its decision could have far-reaching consequences”: David G. Savage has this article in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Affordable Care Act and birth control: Can corporations assert religious rights? The US Supreme Court this week takes up a key question regarding the Affordable Care Act: Can businesses deny employees certain birth control methods based on religious beliefs?”

The Tulsa World reports that “Hobby Lobby contraception case set to go before Supreme Court this week; At issue is whether a corporation can claim religious freedom the same as individuals.”

The Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster (Pa.) New Era has an article headlined “Business and religion collide in Conestoga Woods Supreme Court contraceptive coverage case.”

NewsWorks.org has a report headlined “Lancaster business takes Affordable Care Act challenge to U.S. Supreme Court this week.”

And at Forbes.com, Dale Buss has a post titled “Conestoga Is Silent Party In Obamacare Case, But Convictions Are Clear.”