“Suit against PBSO deputies for 2007 shooting is back in court”: The Palm Beach Post has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

“U.S. court: citizenship law’s gender differences unconstitutional.” Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“State court sets execution dates for three death row inmates”: Curtis Killman (yes, that’s the reporter’s actual name) of The Tulsa World has this report.

The Oklahoman reports that “Oklahoma to execute 3 men in as many weeks.”

Reuters reports that “Oklahoma sets execution dates for inmates who lost Supreme Court case.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Oklahoma court sets execution dates for 3 death row inmates.”

“Louisiana Supreme Court justices denounce same-sex marriage ruling, calling it an ‘insult,’ ‘utter travesty’ with ‘horrific impact'”: The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana has this report.

The Times-Picayune of New Orleans reports that “Louisiana Supreme Court closes door on state’s appeal of same-sex marriage ruling.”

Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News reports that “Louisiana Justice Would Ignore U.S. Supreme Court Same-Sex Marriage Ruling.”

And online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has an essay titled “Louisiana Supreme Court Justices Blast ‘Horrific’ Marriage Equality Decision.”

You can access yesterday’s per curiam ruling of the Supreme Court of Louisiana, and the opinions concurring and dissenting therefrom, at this link.

“Entire Louisiana death row doesn’t need air-conditioning, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals panel decides”: The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana has this report.

Emily Lane of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has an article headlined “No A/C for death row inmates at Angola, appeals court rules.”

And Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Air conditioning not a must on Louisiana death row: appeals court.”

Circuit Judge Edith H. Jones issued today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Meanwhile, a very short dissenting opinion demonstrates that “principal” isn’t your pal if you misuse it in place of “principle.”

“Supreme Court 2014 Term Review: The American Constitution Society hosted a review of the major cases and rulings from the 2014-15 Supreme Court term.” You can access the video of this event, at which Tom Goldstein served as moderator, online at C-SPAN via this link.

“In 9th Circ. insider trading case, Rakoff rejects broad read of 2nd Circ. precedent”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

“Puerto Rico’s ‘Colonial’ Power Struggle”: Online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay that begins, “On the surface, there was nothing shocking about Monday’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit to strike down a Puerto Rico law that would’ve let the commonwealth’s municipalities and utilities declare bankruptcy.”

“The Redskins and The Slants: How an Asian American band name case may affect the Redskins trademark.” Eugene Volokh has this post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Thanks, Justice Scalia, for the Cost-Benefit State”: Law professor Cass R. Sunstein has this essay online at Bloomberg View.

“From ‘rage aria’ to ‘lovely duet,’ opera does justice to court, Ginsburg says”: Geoff Edgers of The Washington Post has this report.

“What Does Marriage Equality Have to Do with Dred Scott?” Amy Davidson has this post online today at The New Yorker.

“Ahead of Fisher, Harvard Asks To Delay Admissions Lawuit; Supreme Court’s decision in Texas affirmative action case could affect Harvard”: The Harvard Crimson has this report.

“Supreme Court’s Bernstein works around blindness”: Gary Heinlein of The Detroit News has an article that begins, “Long work days and intense memorization are part of the job for Michigan Supreme Court member Richard Bernstein, who is blind and says justice should be, too.”

“Fox Is Planning to Make Movie About Same-Sex Marriage Ruling”: This article appears in today’s edition of The New York Times. Law bloggers should keep an eye out for the “SCOTUSblog” casting call.

“Antonin Scalia Is the Supreme Court’s Greatest Writer”: Jeet Heer has this essay online at The New Republic.

“The Prosecutor Who Says Louisiana Should ‘Kill More People'”: In today’s edition of The New York Times, Campbell Robertson has a front page article that begins, “In a much-discussed dissent from the Supreme Court’s ruling on lethal injection last week, Justice Stephen G. Breyer laid out the problems, as he saw them, with the death penalty.”

“When lawyers fail, the remedy is malpractice litigation against the wrongdoer, not more litigation against an innocent adversary in the original litigation.” So wrote Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook in a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

Also yesterday, Judge Easterbrook issued a separate decision in another case presenting many of the same issues.

“U.S. appeals court stays Ohio death row inmate’s potential execution”: Reuters has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal appeals court says condemned Ohio killer can make mental disability claim.”

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

“Court restores conviction, redefining definition of who is Indian in the process”: Cronkite News has this report on an en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

And at the “Turtle Talk” blog, Matthew L.M. Fletcher has a post titled “Ninth Circuit Sitting En Banc Announced ‘Indian Status’ Test under Major Crimes Act.”

As the Cronkite News article explains, “In separate concurring opinions, two judges said the court’s reliance on the ‘degree of Indian blood’ would have the effect of applying the law on racial grounds. The ruling dredged up the ‘sorry history’ of days when courts used ‘blood quantum tests to determine who was a slave and who was free,’ they said.”