“Prosecutors Are Reading Emails From Inmates to Lawyers”: This front page article will appear in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times. According to the article, “across the country, federal prosecutors have begun reading prisoners’ emails to lawyers.”

“Obama’s Health Care Law Has A Confusing Day In Court”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.” In addition, Mara Liasson had an audio segment titled “Obamacare’s Split Decisions Spell Law’s Possible Return To Supreme Court.”

And in commentary, Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times will contain an editorial titled “An Ominous Health Care Ruling.”

Online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay titled “Obamacare Is Safe: Don’t worry, the ruling against heath care subsidies is going to be reversed.” And David Weigel has an essay titled “Did Conservatives Just Win a Leninist Victory Over Obamacare?”

Online at Vox, Ezra Klein has an essay titled “No, the Halbig case isn’t going to destroy Obamacare.”

Online at The New Republic, Brian Beutler has an essay titled “This Shamefully Dishonest Obamacare Ruling Could Blow Up in the GOP’s Face.”

At Politico Magazine, law professor Abbe R. Gluck has an essay titled “What the D.C. Circuit Got Wrong About Obamacare.”

Online at The Daily Beast, Michael Tomasky has an essay titled “Conservatives Find Typo In Obamacare, Try To Kill People With It.”

Online at Ricochet, law professor Richard Epstein has an essay titled “Understanding the Obamacare Subsidy Rulings.”

At National Review Online, Ian Tuttle has an essay titled “Halbig Goes Nuclear: If Tuesday’s ruling is overturned, blame Harry Reid.” And at “The Corner” blog, Hans A. von Spakovsky has a post titled “Obamacare’s Almost Surely Going Back to the Supreme Court“; law professor John Yoo has a post titled “Halbig Could Be Chief Justice Roberts’s Chance to Redeem Himself“; and Andrew C. McCarthy has a post titled “Halbig Is Not About a ‘Drafting Error.’”

“What the Hobby Lobby Ruling Means for America”: Binyamin Appelbaum will have this “It’s the Economy” essay in this upcoming Sunday’s issue of The New York Times Magazine.

“Stanford’s Mariano-Florentino Cuellar tapped for California Supreme Court; Cuellar has been nominated to serve as an associate justice of the California Supreme Court; He is the director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a professor at the law school”: Stanford News has this report.

“Colorado AG loses another round from Court of Appeals on TABOR lawsuit”: The Denver Post has a news update that begins, “Attorney General John Suthers has lost his request to have the entire 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rehear a decision by a court panel that ruled Coloradans have a right to challenge the constitutionality of the Colorado Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.”

You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying rehearing en banc, and the three dissents therefrom, at this link.

“How Obama’s court strategy may help save Obamacare”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has a report that begins, “Last fall, President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid deployed the ‘nuclear option’ to help get three liberal judges onto the D.C. Circuit appeals court. Tuesday’s ruling on Obamacare is a dramatic example of why they forced the issue.”

And Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times reports that “D.C. appeals panel deals big blow to Obamacare subsidies; But second court backs administration on key part of law.”

“Execution in Arizona Is Approved by Justices”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

And Michael Kiefer of The Arizona Republic has a news update headlined “Supreme Court lifts stay of Arizona execution; Joseph Wood will be executed by lethal injection on Wednesday in Florence.”

Having sex on desks is apparently very popular among employees of at least one Indiana prison: So suggests the opening paragraph of an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“7th Circuit splits on arrestee booking fees”: Chicago Daily Law Bulletin has a report that begins, “People forced to pay $30 to the village of Woodridge following their arrest won’t be getting their money back — at least, not any time soon. Splintering four ways after a rare en banc hearing, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday declined to revive a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance that imposed a non-refundable booking fee on anyone arrested in the village.”

You can access yesterday’s 55-page en banc non-decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link.

“Supreme Court allows Arizona execution to proceed”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed an Arizona execution to go forward amid a closely watched First Amendment fight over the secrecy surrounding lethal injection drugs in the country.”

You can access this evening’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.

“The text is what it is, no matter which side benefits.” So observes Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook in an interesting statutory construction decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued today.

“FSU Professor’s Fatal Shooting Rattles Campus”: The ABC News program Good Morning America has this report.

FoxNews.com reports that “Legal community stunned at murder of top law professor.”

At Forbes.com, Danielle Citron has a post titled “Honoring Dan Markel: Life’s Lessons.”

And at “PrawfsBlawg,” Howard Wasserman has a post titled “Memorials for Dan Markel.”

“Arizona asks top court to reverse execution ruling”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Police, community seek answers in renowned FSU law professor’s slaying”: CNN.com has this report.

And The Daily Mail (UK) has a report headlined “‘He was the intended target’: Police in Florida admit they are baffled by murder of Harvard-educated professor Dan Markel after divorced father-of-two shot dead in apparent ‘assassination.’”

“Mexico-born law professor Cuellar chosen for California Supreme Court”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update headlined “Stanford law school professor named to California Supreme Court.”

The Sacramento Bee has a news update headlined “Jerry Brown names law school professor to California Supreme Court.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Law professor nominated to California high court.”

“Slain Toronto professor Dan Markel eulogized by colleagues; Law professors from around the U.S. pen memorial to Toronto-born man killed in Florida”: CBC News has this report.

“Dan Markel died from gushot wound to the head”: Sean Rossman of The Tallahassee Democrat has this news update.

And at the “Just Security” blog, law professor Andy Wright has a post titled “Dan Markel (1972-2014).”

“Courts Issue Conflicting Rulings on Health Care Law”: Robert Pear of The New York Times has this news update reporting on today’s D.C. Circuit ruling in the Halbig case (see this earlier post collecting early news coverage) and today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in King v. Burwell.

The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Federal appeals court panel deals major blow to health law” that begins, “Two federal appellate courts handed down contradictory rulings Tuesday on the legality of a central part of the Affordable Care Act that provides insurance subsidies to millions of Americans in three dozen states that rely on the new federal health insurance marketplace.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “D.C. court ruling deals new blow to Affordable Care Act.”

Brent Kendall and Stephanie Armour of The Wall Street Journal have a news update headlined “Appeals Courts Issue Conflicting Rulings on Health-Law Subsidies; Subsidies Seen as Crucial to Implementation of Affordable Care Act.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Appeals court panel deals blow to Obamacare.”

Politico.com has reports headlined “D.C. Appeals court strikes Obamacare subsidies“; “DOJ to appeal ‘incorrect’ Halbig ruling“; and “GOP: Ruling an Obamacare ‘repudiation.’”

The Hill has reports headlined “Federal appeals court strikes blow against ObamaCare subsidies“; “Second court disagrees, upholds subsidies“; and “Hoyer: Court ignores Congress’s intent.”

Sahil Kapur of TPM DC reports that “Federal Appeals Courts Clash Over Obamacare Subsidies.” And Dylan Scott of TPM DC reports that “4.7 Million Could Lose Obamacare Subsidies After Huge Court Decision.”

“Motrin Lawsuit: Jury Awards Girl $10 Million for Burns and Blindness.” The ABC News program Good Morning America had this report in June 2011.

Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the judgment in plaintiffs’ favor, in a case in which I had briefed and argued the appeal on the plaintiffs’ behalf. You can access today’s ruling at this link, and you can access my clients’ Brief for Appellees at this link.

“Because we conclude that the ACA unambiguously restricts the section 36B subsidy to insurance purchased on Exchanges ‘established by the State,’ we reverse the district court and vacate the IRS’s regulation.” A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today issued its ruling in Halbig v. Burwell.

Senior Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards issued a dissenting opinion that begins, “This case is about Appellants’ not-so-veiled attempt to gut the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

In early news coverage, Andrew Zajac of Bloomberg News reports that “Obamacare Aid for Plan Buyers on U.S. Exchange Overturned.”

David Morgan, Lawrence Hurley, and Aruna Viswanatha of Reuters have a report headlined “Appeals court throws out IRS rule on Obamacare subsidies.”

The Associated Press reports that “Federal appeals court deals blow to health law.”

And Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog” has a post titled “Major new blow to health care law.”

“U.S. Senate confirms Carnes for Atlanta-based appeals bench”: Daniel Malloy of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has an article that begins, “The U.S. Senate on Monday confirmed Judge Julie Carnes to serve on the Atlanta-based U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the first judicial vacancy filled in Georgia since 2011.”

“Remembering Dan Markel”: Orin Kerr has this post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“U.S. court denies bid to reconsider stay of Arizona execution”: Reuters has this report.

The Associated Press reports that “Arizona execution drug case heads to Supreme Court.”

And at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog,” Jacob Gershman has a post titled “Judge Kozinski: Bring Back the Firing Squad.”

You can access yesterday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denying en banc review, and the dissents therefrom, at this link.

“Arizona Seeks to Postpone Ruling on Drug-Induced Abortion”: Bloomberg News has a report that begins, “Arizona is seeking to postpone a ruling that blocked its restrictions on drug-induced abortions while it appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Update: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has posted Arizona’s stay motion at this link.