“£140,000 bill for Supreme Court robes judges will hardly wear”: Today’s edition of The Mail on Sunday (UK) contains an article that begins, “Judges in charge of Britain’s controversial new Supreme Court have been provided with robes they will hardly ever wear at a cost of £137,956 to the taxpayer. The hand-crafted black brocade robes — embroidered with real gold thread — will not be worn by the 12 Supreme Court Justices in normal session. They will be donned only perhaps twice a year for ceremonies such as the State Opening of Parliament or the beginning of the legal year. The rest of the time, the judges will wear everyday suits.”

“For students, a right to be mean online? With schools meting out discipline for what they see as cyber-bullying, some courts, parents and free speech advocates are pushing back.” This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“U.S. Supreme Court: Can Scripture trump non-discrimination law?” UPI has this report.

“Adultery still crime in NH after 200 years”: Norma Love of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The original punishments — including standing on the gallows for an hour with a noose around the neck — have been softened to a $1,200 fine, yet some lawmakers think it’s time for the 200-year-old crime of adultery to come off New Hampshire’s books. Seven months after the state approved gay marriage, lawmakers will consider easing government further from the bedroom with a bill to repeal the adultery law.”

“When California denies a murderer parole, should it need a reason? Eligible prisoners can’t be refused early release just because of the gravity of their crimes — ‘some evidence’ has to show the inmate would pose a threat to public safety, some judges have ruled.” Carol J. Williams has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Menopause, as Brought to You by Big Pharma”: This lengthy article appears today in The New York Times.