“Arizona abortion case likely going to US Supreme Court”: Howard Fischer of The Arizona Daily Star has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Arizona abortion case headed to US Supreme Court.”

“Appeals court hears arguments in Hollister Co. discrimination case”: In late May 2014, The Denver Post published an article that begins, “Attorneys arguing in the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday sparred over whether beach-house-style entrances to Hollister Co. stores discriminate against the disabled.”

Today, the majority on a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a decision vacating the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs and the permanent injunction that resulted.

“Appeals court declines to let Texas immediately enforce anti-abortion law”: The Houston Chronicle has this blog post.

You can access this evening’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.

And online at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a jurisprudence essay titled “A Huge Abortion Win in Texas: But will it last?”

“Delay on health care subsidies case”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Appeals court skeptical of government phone surveillance”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

Spencer Ackerman of The Guardian (UK) has a report headlined “NSA bulk collection of phone data under scrutiny as federal case opens; Justice Department officials face pointed questions on opening day of case that could push NSA privacy to supreme court.”

Newsday has an update headlined “Manhattan federal appeals judges raise privacy concerns at hearing on NSA data leak lawsuit.”

Reuters reports that “Appeals court grills U.S. lawyer on NSA phone collection.”

Bloomberg News reports that “NSA Data-Sweep Lawfulness Challenged in NY Appeal Hearing.”

The Associated Press reports that “US court hears debate in NSA phone records case.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has a blog post titled “Appeals court chilly to feds’ arguments for NSA surveillance program.”

Matt Sledge of The Huffington Post reports that “Judges Express Fears Over NSA Phone Surveillance At Appeals Hearing.”

And at the “Lawfare” blog, Orin Kerr has a post titled “Thoughts on the CA2 Argument on Section 215 in ACLU v. Clapper.”

“U.S. court revives Botox-linked shareholder suit against Allergan”: Dan Levine of Reuters has this report.

And Courthouse News Service has a report headlined “New Life for Botox Investor Case in 9th Circuit.”

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

“Court: US can withhold Guantanamo detainee images.” The Associated Press has this report.

And Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has a report headlined “Photos of alleged 9/11 ’20th hijacker’ can stay classified: court.”

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

“Beards in Prison Hold Next Religion Test for Supreme Court”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Sotomayor to receive Hepburn Medal from Bryn Mawr”: The Associated Press has this report.

Bryn Mawr College’s official announcement is headlined “Bryn Mawr College to Award 2015 Katharine Hepburn Medal to Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.”

ACLU v. Clapper Oral Argument”: C-SPAN has posted online at this link the video of today’s oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Sixth Circuit grants rehearing en banc to reconsider telecommuting as a disability accommodation in EEOC v. Ford Motor Co. You can access Friday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (posted online today) granting rehearing en banc at this link.

My earlier coverage of the divided three-judge panel’s original ruling in favor of the EEOC can be accessed here. At that earlier post noted, “Eugene Scalia argued the appeal on behalf of appellee Ford Motor Co.”

“Indiana Right-to-Work Law Upheld by U.S. Court as Constitutional”: Bloomberg News has this early report on the ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued today.

Chief Judge Diane P. Wood’s dissenting opinion begins:

Today’s decision is either incorrect or it lays bare an unconstitutional confiscation perpetuated by our current system of labor law.

You can access the dissenting opinion directly via this link.

Update: In other coverage, Amanda Becker of Reuters reports that “U.S. appeals court upholds Indiana’s right-to-work law.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal court upholds Indiana right-to-work law.”

“Constitution Check: What are the Supreme Court’s options now on same-sex marriage?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Texas Voter ID Trial May Lead to Return of U.S. Oversight”: Bloomberg News has this report.