“Mass. abortion clinic buffer zones ruled illegal”: This front page article appears in today’s edition of The Boston Globe, along with a front page article headlined “No finger-pointing at AG Martha Coakley over ruling.”

The Boston Herald reports that “Abortion ruling has officials scrambling.”

The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts has articles headlined “Abortion protesters thrilled after Supreme Court strikes down clinic ‘buffer zones’“; “Anti-abortion plaintiff Eleanor McCullen says clinic protests are about ‘surrounding women with love’“; and “Reproductive rights activist Bill Baird: Supreme Court decision on abortion clinic buffer ‘horrendous day’ for women’s rights.”

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Adam Liptak and John Schwartz have a front page article headlined “Court Rejects Zone to Buffer Abortion Clinic.”

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Court strikes down abortion clinic buffer zones.”

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court rejects abortion clinic buffer zone in nuanced ruling.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court strikes down abortion clinic buffer zone.”

Stephanie Haven of McClatchy Washington Bureau reports that “Abortion clinic buffer zone violates free speech, Supreme Court says.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Supreme Court, 9-0, nixes 35-foot ‘buffer zone’ at abortion clinic.”

Cheryl Wetzstein of The Washington Times reports that “Unanimous court strikes down abortion ‘buffer’ for protesters.”

Greg Stohr and Andrew Harris of Bloomberg News report that “Abortion-Clinic Buffer Zone Struck Down by Top U.S. Court.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. high court curbs state limits on abortion clinic protests.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion analysis: A broader right to oppose abortion.”

“A Prodigious Beginning, Then an Early Ending: ‘The Internet’s Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz.'” Jeannette Catsoulis has this movie review in today’s edition of The New York Times. The newspaper has designated the movie a “NYT Critics’ Pick.”

“New York’s Ban on Big Sodas Is Rejected by Final Court”: This article appears in today’s edition of The New York Times reporting on a ruling that the New York State Court of Appeals issued yesterday.

And in other coverage, The New York Daily News reports that “Big sugary sodas win again! N.Y. Court of Appeals rules city had no right to restrict soda sizes.”

“The Supreme Court Was Right to Allow Anti-Abortion Protests”: Law professor Laurence H. Tribe has this essay online at The New York Times.

“The Supreme Court’s Powerful New Consensus”: Law professor Neal K. Katyal has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Murphy’s Law”: In the July 7, 2014 issue of National Review, Ed Whelan has this review of Bruce Allen Murphy‘s new book, “Scalia: A Court of One.”

“The Fourth Amendment Goes Digital: The Supreme Courts shows it understands how cellphones tip the privacy balance.” Ian MacDougall has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.