“Adoptions Rise by Same-Sex Couples, Despite Legal Barriers”: This article will appear Tuesday in The New York Times.

“Whatever else the term means or includes, the phrase ‘the people’ in the Second Amendment of the Constitution does not include aliens illegally in the United States”: So holds the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in a ruling issued today.

In dissent, Circuit Judge James L. Dennis responds as follows:

Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent recognize that the phrase “the people” has the same meaning in the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments. The majority’s determination that Portillo-Munoz is not part of “the people” effectively means that millions of similarly situated residents of the United States are “non-persons” who have no rights to be free from unjustified searches of their homes and bodies and other abuses, nor to peaceably assemble or petition the government. In my view, Portillo-Munoz clearly satisfies the criteria given by the Supreme Court and our court for determining whether he is part of “the people”: he has come to the United States voluntarily and accepted some societal obligations.

(footnotes omitted).

“Too Gay To Judge? The preposterous, appalling effort to disqualify Vaughn Walker from judging the California gay marriage case because he is gay.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court upholds recusal rule”: Robert Barnes will have this article Tuesday in The Washington Post.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court upholds ethics laws; Reversing a Nevada high court ruling, the Supreme Court said that legislators do not have a free speech right to vote on matters in which they have a conflict of interest; In a 9-0 vote, the justices said the 1st Amendment does not shield a legislator charged with an ethics violation.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has a news update headlined “Ethics rules don’t violate free speech, Supreme Court says.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “High Court Upholds Nevada Ethics Law.”

The Las Vegas Review-Journal has a news update headlined “High court upholds Nevada ethics law.”

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Upholds Nevada Ethics Law” featuring Nina Totenberg.

“In 5-4 Vote, Supreme Court Limits Securities Fraud Suits”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

“Supreme Court deadlocks in peculiar case about US citizenship”: Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“Skepticism over tossing gay judge’s Prop. 8 ruling”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this news update.

Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update headlined “Federal judge considers whether Proposition 8 trial judge may have been biased.”

The Associated Press reports that “Gay judge’s relationship aired in CA marriage case.”

And Bloomberg News has a report headlined “Gay Judge’s Calif. Marriage Ruling Invalid: Group.”

“Dictionary Citations by Justices Rise Sharply”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Appeals court rules MySpace parodies protected by First Amendment”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a news update that begins, “The Third Circuit Court of Appeals today held that two Pennsylvania students who created MySpace profiles making fun of their school principals were protected by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, and could not be punished by their school districts.”

“Appeals Court Backs Students in Internet Parodies of Principals”: At the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post that begins, “In a major pair of decisions on the free speech rights of students in the Internet era, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday that students who ridiculed their principals online could not be punished by school authorities because the speech was created off campus and did not substantially disrupt schools.”

“Justices Decline to Hear Pledge of Allegiance Challenge”: Mark Walsh has this post at the “School Law” blog of Education Week.

“Pa. teens win MySpace speech case”: The Associated Press has this report.

My earlier coverage of today’s en banc Third Circuit rulings appears at this link.

“Court upholds strict standard in capital cases; Defendants must prove they are mentally disabled beyond a reasonable doubt”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this news update reporting on a ruling that the Supreme Court of Georgia issued today.

According to the article, “By a 6-1 vote, the court allowed Georgia to remain the only state in the country that requires capital defendants to prove they are mentally disabled beyond a reasonable doubt, the most stringent burden of proof in the justice system.”

“Court declines to reconsider charter school decision”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a news update that begins, “The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday said it has declined to reconsider its recently issued 4-3 decision that declared the charter school law unconstitional.”

“At term’s end, Supreme Court opinions anything but brief”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

“Obama’s Law: A new argument about his legal philosophy–and its troubling consequences.” Law professor Justin Driver has this cover story (pass-through link) in the June 30, 2011 issue of The New Republic.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issues en banc rulings in two cases involving students disciplined for ridiculing their principals online: You can access today’s ruling in Layshock v. Hermitage School Dist. at this link.

And you can access today’s ruling in J.S. v. Blue Mountain School Dist. at this link.

My earlier coverage of these cases can be accessed here, here, and here.

The Associated Press has previously covered these cases in articles headlined “Lawyers for Pa. students, schools argue over off-campus speech“; “3rd Circuit considers whether schools can punish off-campus speech“; “3rd Circuit rulings cloud issue of off-campus student speech“; and “Pa. student had right to parody principal, federal judge rules.”

Access online today’s Order List and rulings in argued cases of the U.S. Supreme Court: You can access today’s Order List at this link. The Court granted review in four cases.

In addition, the Court issued rulings in four argued cases.

1. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court in United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, No. 10-382. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, which Justice Stephen G. Breyer joined. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, No. 09-525. Justice Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court in Nevada Comm’n on Ethics v. Carrigan, No. 10-568. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Alito issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. Finally, in Flores-Villar v. United States, No. 09-5801, the Court issued a per curiam order affirming by an equally divided vote. Justice Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High court upholds Nevada ethics law“; “Court rejects sex bias claim on citizenship rule“; “Court blocks investors’ claims against Janus“; “Court to decide on appeals deadline“; “Court to decide whether farmers must pay tax“; “Court orders reconsideration of parole judgment“; “Court turns away appeal over Steinbeck copyrights“; and “Court eyes restitution in Petters’ Ponzi case.”

“Battle over Proposition 8 judge’s same-sex relationship heads to court”: Howard Mintz has this article today in The San Jose Mercury News.

The Associated Press reports that “Lawyers target gay marriage ruling by Calif judge.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “When A Gay Judge Rules On Gay Rights.”

And in yesterday’s edition of The Sacramento Bee, Courtney A. Powers had an op-ed entitled “Judges should not have to open up their private lives.”