“Wisconsin Court Reinstates Law on Union Rights”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

“High court spurns atheist’s ‘under God’ challenge”: Bob Egelko has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Can you appeal a final judgment rendered against someone else? Especially when you aren’t a named party to the lawsuit and voluntarily left the case long ago? At least generally, and specifically in this case, the answer is no.” So begins an opinion that Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

“Ruling Blocks Realtor From Suing Over Comments on Rival’s Blog”: Wednesday’s edition of The New York Law Journal will contain an article that begins, “New York’s highest court attempted for the first time yesterday to draw a line between when website operators can claim the protection of federal law for objectionable material provided by third parties and when they can be sued for libelous content.”

The Associated Press reports that “NY’s top court rejects online defamation lawsuit.”

And Reuters has an article headlined “Blog not liable for defamatory comment: NY high court.”

You can access today’s 4-3 ruling of the New York State Court of Appeals at this link.

“Supreme Court reinstates collective bargaining law”: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a news update that begins, “Acting with unusual speed, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated Gov. Scott Walker’s plan to all but end collective bargaining for tens of thousands of public workers.”

The Wisconsin State Journal has a news update headlined “Supreme Court clears way for collective bargaining law to take effect.”

The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Wisconsin Union Law to Take Effect.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court allows Wisconsin’s union law to take effect.”

And Reuters reports that “Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds anti-union law.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin at this link.

“Accordingly, the Motion to Vacate Judgment on the sole ground of Judge Walker’s same-sex relationship is DENIED.” You can access today’s ruling of Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware of the Northern District of California at this link.

In early news coverage, Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has a blog post titled “Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge rules.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Gay judge’s same-sex marriage ruling upheld.”

Woman’s conviction for piercing cats upheld: Sorry, no euphemisms here. The Associated Press reports that “Pierced-cat seller’s cruelty conviction upheld.”

And The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania reports today that “Cruelty to ‘goth cats’ conviction is upheld; Woman accused of piercing the ears and necks of three kittens, docking their tails.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Contract to Defend DOMA Violates Spending Law, Complaint Says”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” David Ingram has a post that begins, “A nonprofit group said today it is filing an ethics complaint against U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) over how he and other House Republican leaders plan to pay for litigation over the federal Defense of Marriage Act.”

“Scalia continues his history of relying on history”: Tony Mauro has this analysis online at the First Amendment Center.

“Appellate court to rehear case on CPS teacher firings”: The Chicago Tribune has a report that begins, “The federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday vacated an earlier opinion that Chicago Public Schools improperly fired nearly 750 tenured teachers last summer, and has asked the Illinois Supreme Court to weigh in on several issues in the case.”

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

“US court to decide rights of Walmart and its women”: This article appears today in The Sydney Morning Herald.

“Judge to decide Calif. gay marriage case Tuesday”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal judge is deciding whether a gay judge’s ruling to strike down California’s same-sex marriage ban should be overturned because he failed to divulge his own marital intentions before throwing out the voter-approved measure.”

“Stevens: ‘I Was Never a Fan of Labels for Justices.'” Gwen Ifill interviewed retired Justice John Paul Stevens on yesterday evening’s broadcast of the PBS program “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.” You can access both the video and a transcript of the interview via this link.

“Clarence Thomas takes hard line on defendants”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

“Appeals court limits punishment for speech or writing done by students out of school”: Joseph A. Slobodzian has this article today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

The Republican-Herald of Pottsville, Pennsylvania reports today that “Blue Mountain teen wins MySpace speech case.”

And The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports that “Pennsylvania districts lose cases over MySpace parodies.”

“In summer, justices head for enviable destinations”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Adoptions Rise by Same-Sex Couples, Despite Legal Barriers”: This article will appear Tuesday in The New York Times.

“Whatever else the term means or includes, the phrase ‘the people’ in the Second Amendment of the Constitution does not include aliens illegally in the United States”: So holds the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in a ruling issued today.

In dissent, Circuit Judge James L. Dennis responds as follows:

Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent recognize that the phrase “the people” has the same meaning in the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments. The majority’s determination that Portillo-Munoz is not part of “the people” effectively means that millions of similarly situated residents of the United States are “non-persons” who have no rights to be free from unjustified searches of their homes and bodies and other abuses, nor to peaceably assemble or petition the government. In my view, Portillo-Munoz clearly satisfies the criteria given by the Supreme Court and our court for determining whether he is part of “the people”: he has come to the United States voluntarily and accepted some societal obligations.

(footnotes omitted).

“Too Gay To Judge? The preposterous, appalling effort to disqualify Vaughn Walker from judging the California gay marriage case because he is gay.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court upholds recusal rule”: Robert Barnes will have this article Tuesday in The Washington Post.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court upholds ethics laws; Reversing a Nevada high court ruling, the Supreme Court said that legislators do not have a free speech right to vote on matters in which they have a conflict of interest; In a 9-0 vote, the justices said the 1st Amendment does not shield a legislator charged with an ethics violation.”

Joan Biskupic of USA Today has a news update headlined “Ethics rules don’t violate free speech, Supreme Court says.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “High Court Upholds Nevada Ethics Law.”

The Las Vegas Review-Journal has a news update headlined “High court upholds Nevada ethics law.”

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Upholds Nevada Ethics Law” featuring Nina Totenberg.

“In 5-4 Vote, Supreme Court Limits Securities Fraud Suits”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

“Supreme Court deadlocks in peculiar case about US citizenship”: Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“Skepticism over tossing gay judge’s Prop. 8 ruling”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this news update.

Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update headlined “Federal judge considers whether Proposition 8 trial judge may have been biased.”

The Associated Press reports that “Gay judge’s relationship aired in CA marriage case.”

And Bloomberg News has a report headlined “Gay Judge’s Calif. Marriage Ruling Invalid: Group.”

“Dictionary Citations by Justices Rise Sharply”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Appeals court rules MySpace parodies protected by First Amendment”: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a news update that begins, “The Third Circuit Court of Appeals today held that two Pennsylvania students who created MySpace profiles making fun of their school principals were protected by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, and could not be punished by their school districts.”

“Appeals Court Backs Students in Internet Parodies of Principals”: At the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post that begins, “In a major pair of decisions on the free speech rights of students in the Internet era, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday that students who ridiculed their principals online could not be punished by school authorities because the speech was created off campus and did not substantially disrupt schools.”

“Justices Decline to Hear Pledge of Allegiance Challenge”: Mark Walsh has this post at the “School Law” blog of Education Week.

“Pa. teens win MySpace speech case”: The Associated Press has this report.

My earlier coverage of today’s en banc Third Circuit rulings appears at this link.

“Court upholds strict standard in capital cases; Defendants must prove they are mentally disabled beyond a reasonable doubt”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this news update reporting on a ruling that the Supreme Court of Georgia issued today.

According to the article, “By a 6-1 vote, the court allowed Georgia to remain the only state in the country that requires capital defendants to prove they are mentally disabled beyond a reasonable doubt, the most stringent burden of proof in the justice system.”

“Court declines to reconsider charter school decision”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a news update that begins, “The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday said it has declined to reconsider its recently issued 4-3 decision that declared the charter school law unconstitional.”

“At term’s end, Supreme Court opinions anything but brief”: Joan Biskupic has this article today in USA Today.

“Obama’s Law: A new argument about his legal philosophy–and its troubling consequences.” Law professor Justin Driver has this cover story (pass-through link) in the June 30, 2011 issue of The New Republic.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issues en banc rulings in two cases involving students disciplined for ridiculing their principals online: You can access today’s ruling in Layshock v. Hermitage School Dist. at this link.

And you can access today’s ruling in J.S. v. Blue Mountain School Dist. at this link.

My earlier coverage of these cases can be accessed here, here, and here.

The Associated Press has previously covered these cases in articles headlined “Lawyers for Pa. students, schools argue over off-campus speech“; “3rd Circuit considers whether schools can punish off-campus speech“; “3rd Circuit rulings cloud issue of off-campus student speech“; and “Pa. student had right to parody principal, federal judge rules.”

Access online today’s Order List and rulings in argued cases of the U.S. Supreme Court: You can access today’s Order List at this link. The Court granted review in four cases.

In addition, the Court issued rulings in four argued cases.

1. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court in United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, No. 10-382. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, which Justice Stephen G. Breyer joined. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, No. 09-525. Justice Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court in Nevada Comm’n on Ethics v. Carrigan, No. 10-568. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Alito issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. Finally, in Flores-Villar v. United States, No. 09-5801, the Court issued a per curiam order affirming by an equally divided vote. Justice Kagan did not take part in the ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High court upholds Nevada ethics law“; “Court rejects sex bias claim on citizenship rule“; “Court blocks investors’ claims against Janus“; “Court to decide on appeals deadline“; “Court to decide whether farmers must pay tax“; “Court orders reconsideration of parole judgment“; “Court turns away appeal over Steinbeck copyrights“; and “Court eyes restitution in Petters’ Ponzi case.”

“Battle over Proposition 8 judge’s same-sex relationship heads to court”: Howard Mintz has this article today in The San Jose Mercury News.

The Associated Press reports that “Lawyers target gay marriage ruling by Calif judge.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment entitled “When A Gay Judge Rules On Gay Rights.”

And in yesterday’s edition of The Sacramento Bee, Courtney A. Powers had an op-ed entitled “Judges should not have to open up their private lives.”