“Roy Moore’s ouster from Supreme Court largely absent in chief justice race”: The Mobile (Ala.) Press-Register has this report.

“Bill to put cameras in Supreme Court won’t pass before healthcare challenge”: The Hill has this report.

“Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor will help Penn law school open a new building”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Supreme Court 101 in session at high court”: The Associated Press has this report.

“State Supreme Court opts to close some meetings”: The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, via the Wisconsin Law Journal, has a report that begins, “A sharply divided Wisconsin Supreme Court voted Monday to end its longstanding practice of discussing court administrative matters in open conference.”

“Corporate Personhood Case Forces Supreme Court To Hack New Path”: Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post has this report.

To complicate matters further, Judge Jury now serves in an appellate capacity: I just received news that last week the U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit issued a decision agreeing with the outcome that my friend and colleague Peter Goldberger and I argued in favor of in an amicus brief that we filed in May of 2011 on behalf of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

Among the more interesting things one might learn upon receiving a ruling of the 9th Circuit’s BAP is that one of the judges on that court is Meredith A. Jury (additional details available here). I have noticed various judges over the years with the last name Judge or Justice, but this is the first Judge Jury whom I have noticed. Appropriately, she now serves on an appellate court.

“Montana Defies Supreme Court’s Citizens United Case”: This audio segment appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Supreme Court rejects emergency carp measures”: The Associated Press has this report.

And Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire reports that “Justices decline to intervene in Asian carp dispute.”

“BofA $8.5 bln deal returned to NY state court”: Reuters has this early coverage of a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this afternoon.

“FBI Turns Off Thousands of GPS Devices After Supreme Court Ruling”: Julia Angwin had this post Saturday at WSJ.com’s “Digits” blog.

“Free speech issue bypassed”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Supreme court prepares for battle over human rights liability of corporations; Most significant case since Citizens United ruling will tackle whether corporations can be sued in civil courts as individuals”: The Guardian (UK) has this report.

“Will Bush v. Gore make an election-year return?” Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted its Order List at this link. The Court did not grant review in any new cases today.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court won’t get involved in carp fight.”

And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court rejects states’ appeal on Great Lakes carp.”

“Supreme Court to weigh torture lawsuits against corporations; Can international companies be sued in the U.S. over ties to foreign regimes that commit human rights abuses?” David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“‘Retirement’ missing from vocabulary of NY judges”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Some are old enough to recall pioneering aviator Charles Lindbergh’s tickertape parade. Others can share vivid memories of World War II or the Great Depression. But unlike most people their age, New York City’s federal judges prefer to strike one topic from the record: retirement.”

“Chief justice: Iowa Supreme Court stronger after 2010 ousters.” The Associated Press has this report.

“Gun ownership ‘very difficult’ despite Supreme Court rulings”: Shannon Bream of FoxNews.com has a report that begins, “In 2008, after hearing a case challenging the restrictive gun laws in Washington, D.C., the Supreme Court ordered local officials to make it possible for law-abiding citizens to own a gun. It was a landmark Second Amendment win for gun rights advocates, but there is growing disagreement about what’s happened in the wake of that ruling from the nation’s highest court.”

“Police groups ask Supreme Court to overturn SPD Taser ruling; A national police organization and Los Angeles County police group want the court to hear an appeal opposed by Seattle city attorneys”: This article appeared yesterday in The Seattle Times.

My most recent earlier coverage of the case appears here.

“Does the Supreme Court think like the average American?” Justin Moyer has this essay today in The Washington Post.

“Justices weigh foreigners’ suits vs. companies”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: A cry of innocence from death row.” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.

“Before Supreme Court, Indianapolis to defend charging different amounts for sewers”: The Indianapolis Star has an article that begins, “Whether the good fortune of some Indianapolis homeowners who saved themselves thousands of dollars simply by putting off paying a bill is unconstitutionally unfair will be debated by the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday.”

“Biden praises Rhode Island’s senators, says he offered Whitehouse Supreme Court nomination”: The Providence Journal has this report.

“Forcing Defendant to Decrypt Hard Drive Is Unconstitutional, Appeals Court Rules”: David Kravets has this post at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.

“Supreme Court to hear corporate human rights case”: James Vicini of Reuters has this report.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument preview: Human rights abuses and the law.”

And in today’s edition of The New York Times, Peter Weiss has an op-ed entitled “Should Corporations Have More Leeway to Kill Than People Do?”

“Nevis man accused of US justice robbery released”: The Associated Press has this report.

“U.S. appeals panel assesses Porsche-VW short squeeze”: Reuters has a report that begins, “Federal appeals judges on Friday honed in on whether a U.S. Supreme Court ruling limiting securities fraud lawsuits barred a $2 billion case by hedge funds accusing German automaker Porsche SE of fraudulently cornering the market in Volkswagen AG shares in 2008.”

“U.S. House appeals benefits ruling for gay spouse”: Dan Levine of Reuters has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “House leaders to appeal Calif. gay marriage ruling.”

“The Man Behind the Texas Anti-Affirmative Action Suit”: The Texas Tribune has this report today.

“Analysis: Obama yet to make a mark on key U.S. court.” Joan Biskupic of Reuters has this report.

“Eleventh Circuit Finds Fifth Amendment Right Against Self Incrimination Protects Against Being Forced to Decrypt Hard Drive Contents”: Orin Kerr has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

And at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog,” Joe Palazzolo has a post titled “Court: Fifth Amendment Protects Suspects from Having to Decrypt Hard Drives.”

Meanwhile, at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Ruling Stands: Defendant Must Decrypt Laptop” reporting on a separate case.

“Court Holds Returning to Romantic Relationship Is Not Sufficient ‘Consideration’ To Support Enforceable Contract; Reaffirms 1887 Holding that ‘Love and Affection’ Alone Is Not Consideration for Contract”: The Public Information Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio has issued this summary of a ruling that the court issued today.

“Justices Appear Open to Affirming Medal Law”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times. The newspaper also contains an editorial entitled “Honor and Free Speech.”

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that “Supreme Court conflicted about prosecuting those who lie about military valor.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court hears Medal of Honor case, ponders political lies; The Supreme Court seems unmoved by Xavier Alvarez of Pomona, who lied about receiving a Medal of Honor; His lawyer says the 1st Amendment trumps the Stolen Valor Act.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Justices Take on Medal Lies; Respect for Military Honors Competes With Worries About Government’s Reach.”

On yesterday evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “Is A Lie Just Free Speech, Or Is It A Crime?”

Online at the First Amendment Center, Tony Mauro reports that “Justices may uphold Stolen Valor Act.”

And online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has a Supreme Court dispatch entitled “Heavy Medals: Sotomayor’s boyfriends lie to her? And the other untruths that worry the Supreme Court.”