“U.S. Government’s Snooping Is Fine by One Court”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.

“Supreme Court Sides With Prosecutors in Insider Trading Case”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court makes prosecution easier of those who ‘gift’ insider information.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court affirms broad reach of insider-trading laws.”

Aruna Viswanatha and Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Hardens Stance on Insider Trading; Justices, in unanimous decision, affirm conviction of Bassam Salman, who had used information from his brother-in-law.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Insider-Trading Prosecutions Backed by U.S. Supreme Court.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN.com reports that “Supreme Court ruling makes insider trading cases easier to prosecute.”

And Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Makes It Easier For Federal Prosecutors To Go After Insider Trading; And the biggest winner of them all is Wall Street’s toughest cop.”

“Supreme Court Gives Samsung a Reprieve in Apple Patent Case”: Adam Liptak and Vindu Goel have this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court rules for Samsung in smartphone patent dispute.”

David G. Savage and Paresh Dave of The Los Angeles Times have an article headlined “Supreme Court: Samsung doesn’t owe Apple $400 million for copying iPhone look.”

Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal has an article headlined “Supreme Court: Lower Court Should Reconsider What Samsung Owes Apple; Samsung has been challenging a $399 million award to Apple for infringing on design patents.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Samsung wins Supreme Court fight with Apple.”

Ken Shepherd of The Washington Times reports that “Unanimous Supreme Court ruling hands Samsung a key win in ongoing patent case with Apple.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Top Court Orders New Look at Apple’s $399 Million Award From Samsung.”

Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Rules Samsung Won’t Owe Apple $400 Million Over Patent Violations; The justices sent the case back to a lower court to reassess the proper amount of damages.”

Joe Mullin of Ars Technica reports that “Samsung victorious at Supreme Court fight with 8-0 opinion against Apple; Apple can’t automatically get Samsung’s full profits due to patent infringement.”

Hamza Shaban of BuzzFeed News reports that “Supreme Court Sides With Samsung In Patent War With Apple; The justices ordered the case to be resettled by a lower court, throwing out a $399 million judgment against Samsung for infringing on Apple’s iPhone patents.”

At the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Lyle Denniston has a post titled “A victory — for now — for Samsung in the smartphone wars.”

And in commentary, online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Supreme Court’s Text Message in Samsung v. Apple.”

Access online the audio of two notable cases argued yesterday at the Fourth Circuit: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has posted online at this link (32.1 MB mp3 audio file) the audio of yesterday’s oral argument in United States v. v. Jeffrey Sterling. My earlier post collecting coverage of the oral argument can be accessed here.

And you can access at this link (27.3 MB mp3 audio file) the transcript of yesterday’s Fourth Circuit oral argument in United States v. Richard Schmidt. My recent posts linking to coverage of this case can be accessed here and here.

“Could moving a giant cross or cutting off its arms resolve a 1st Amendment case?” Ann E. Marimow has this report on an appeal argued today before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

“Business sues state over same-sex laws”: David Unze has this front page article in today’s edition of The St. Cloud (Minn.) Times.

In today’s edition of The Minneapolis Star Tribune, Stephen Montemayor has a front page article headlined “St. Cloud couple file suit so they can deny wedding services to same-sex couples; Business wants only heterosexual customers.”

And Gina Cherelus of Reuters reports that “Video company challenges Minnesota law on serving gay couples.”

“Trump’s First 100 Days: His Supreme Court choice could have a lifetime impact.” Bill Mears of FoxNews.com has this report.

“Could Democrats go ‘nuclear’ one last time before President Trump?” Today at “The Fix” blog of The Washington Post, Aaron Blake has an interesting entry that begins, “The Republican strategy of ignoring President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court this year paid clear dividends.”

“The Top Legal Stories of 2017”: Online at The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin has a post that begins, “It’s time for my semi-accurate, semi-serious (but always annual) list of predictions of the big legal stories for the coming year.”

Among Toobin’s predictions contained therein, “President Trump appoints Judge Diane Sykes to the Supreme Court.”

“Body Shops’ Filing Error Ends 11th Circ. Insurer Suit”: Matthew Guarnaccia of Law360.com has an article (subscription required for full access) that begins, “The Eleventh Circuit on Tuesday said a group of automotive repair shops cannot reinstate claims against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. and other insurers over an alleged scheme to manipulate vehicle repair costs, shooting down arguments that the court was at fault for the lateness of their appeal.”

According to the article, the filing error consisted of the appellants’ failure to file the appendix on appeal within the time ordinarily provided for doing so.

Access the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., No. 15-649: At this link.

“Scalia replacement could move court rightward on criminal justice”: Joan Biskupic of CNN.com has this report.

“Bench Brackets: The Battle for the Next SCOTUS Justice (Part 1).” Bloomberg BNA has posted online this video segment featuring Kimberly Robinson and Patrick Gregory.

“When free speech comes at a cost”: Jason Nark has this article in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Judge Jon O. Newman to Receive 2016 Devitt Award”: The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts issued this news release today.

The news release also reports that “the selection committee, made up of federal judges and headed by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, also designated one of Newman’s Second Circuit colleagues, Senior Judge Ralph K. Winter, to be the Devitt Award winner in 2017.”

“Lee v. Tam: Offensive Trademarks at the Supreme Court — Speech Rights and Government Prerogative (A Series); Part Three: The Best Arguments for Allowing the Denial of Registration to Disparaging Trademarks.” Erica Goldberg has this post at her “In a Crowded Theater” blog.

“Supreme Court Case Has Bankruptcy World on Edge”: Libby Lewis has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times about the case being argued today at the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Court paves way for Gay-Straight Alliance at middle schools”: Livi Stanford of The Daily Commercial of Leesburg, Florida has this report.

Jason Ruiter and Jerry Fallstrom of The Orlando Sentinel have an article headlined “ACLU: Appeals court ruling allows gay-straight-alliance clubs.”

At the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post titled “Federal Appeals Court Revives Gay-Straight Alliance Suit in Florida.”

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a post titled “Algebra class means junior high school must allow Gay-Straight Alliance.”

Circuit Judge William H. Pryor Jr. wrote yesterday’s ruling on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

“Judges allow hunters to sue Fish and Wildlife Service over elephant trophy ban”: Andrea Noble of The Washington Times has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued yesterday.