“The court’s conservatives don’t care how much you hate Citizens United.” Dahlia Lithwick has this post online at Slate.

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court: No Reconsideration Of Citizens United.”

“Supreme Court strikes down mandatory life sentences for juveniles”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court bars mandatory life sentences for juveniles; Supreme Court ruling aims to give judges and juries an opportunity to consider ‘mitigating circumstances’ before sentencing a juvenile offender to life in prison, without possibility of parole.”

Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Strikes Down Mandatory Life Without Parole For Teens Convicted Of Murder.”

This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “Justices Bar Mandatory Life Terms for Juveniles.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion recap: Narrow ruling on young murderers’ sentences.”

“Supreme Court upholds part of strict Arizona immigration law”: Michael Doyle and David Lightman of McClatchy Newspapers have this report.

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Most of Arizona immigration law cannot stand, Supreme Court rules; But the Supreme Court upheld a provision requiring police to check the immigration status of people they have reason to suspect are illegal immigrants — the most controversial part of the Arizona immigration law.”

Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post has a report headlined “Arizona Immigration Law Ruling: Supreme Court Delivers Split Decision.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion recap: Immigration and judicial styles.”

This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court Leaves Core Of Immigration Law Intact.”

At The Daily Beast, law professor Adam Winkler has an essay entitled “What the Supreme Court’s Arizona Ruling Means for Immigration and Health Care.”

And online at The Nation, law professor David Cole has an essay entitled “Anti-Immigrant Forces Lose Big in Supreme Court.”

“SCOTUSblog Is The Talk Of The Twitterverse As Court Rules On Major Cases”: TPM DC has this report.

“Supreme Court won’t revisit Citizens United decision”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers has this report.

The Missoulian has a news update headlined “Supreme Court nixes state’s ban on corporate campaign spending.”

Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Reversed Anti-Citizens United Ruling From Montana.”

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment entitled “High Court: No Reconsideration Of Citizens United.”

“Posner ruling makes smartphone patent war economically irrational”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report.

And Bloomberg News reports that “Apple-Motorola Mobility Patent Suit Ended By U.S. Judge.”

My earlier coverage of last Friday’s ruling can be accessed here.

“What it looks like when justices tear into each other–from up close.” Dahlia Lithwick has this post at Slate.

Update: In addition, Emily Bazelon has a post titled “The justices seem to understand that juveniles aren’t like the rest of us.”

And Walter Dellinger has a post titled “People are painting the Arizona immigration case as a ‘split verdict.’ Nope, the feds won big.”

In the July 2012 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Steven Seidenberg has an article headlined “New Laws of Nature Law: Ruling Questions Scientific Patents.”

And Leslie A. Gordon has an article headlined “Pruning the Judicial Branch: State Laws Target ‘Activist Judges.’”

“Supreme Court won’t hear Mt. Soledad cross case”: J. Harry Jones and Greg Moran of The San Diego Union-Tribune have this news update.

The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear appeal on Mt. Soledad cross.”

And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court clears way for California cross removal.”

“Opinion recap: Citizens United solidified.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Supreme Court rules juvenile life without parole cruel and unusual”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

Online at The New Yorker, Rachel Aviv has a blog post titled “A Cruel and Unusual Sentence for A Fourteen-Year-Old Murderer.” In the January 2, 2012 issue of the magazine, Aviv had a lengthy article headlined “No Remorse: Should a teen-ager be given a life sentence?”

And New York University School of Law has issued a news release headlined “Bryan Stevenson achieves latest victory before Supreme Court.”

“Deal names Blackwell to state Supreme Court”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a news update that begins, “Georgia’s next Supreme Court justice will be a former prosecutor with strong conservative credentials, including a stint working on the state’s challenge to the Obama administration’s health care law.”

“Justices will hear two Clean Water Act cases”: Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire has this report.

“Supreme Court says states may not impose mandatory life sentences on juvenile murderers”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this news update.

And The New York Times has a news update headlined “Justices Bar Mandatory Life Terms for Juveniles.”

“Supreme Court Declines to Revisit Citizens United”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

And Robert Barnes and Dan Eggen of The Washington Post have a news update headlined “Supreme Court throws out Montana ban on corporate campaign spending.”

“Supreme Court strengthens Citizens United decision with Montana ruling”: The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

“Supreme Court rejects much of Arizona immigration law”: Robert Barnes and N. C. Aizenmann of The Washington Post have this news update.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court issues split decision on Arizona immigration law.”

The New York Times has a news update headlined “Supreme Court Upholds Key Part of Arizona Law.”

The Arizona Republic has a news update headlined “Arizona immigration law: Supreme Court upholds key portions of Senate Bill 1070; Three other parts of controversial immigration law ruled unconstitutional.”

The Arizona Daily Star has a news update headlined “Supreme Court upholds immigration checks by cops in Arizona.”

At Politico.com, Josh Gerstein has a report headlined “Supreme Court Arizona immigration ruling: Justices clear key part.”

And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Marcia Coyle has a post titled “Supreme Court Narrows Arizona Immigration Law.”

“A Look Back at Court’s Arguments on Health Care, Laugh Count Included”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Bloomberg News is reporting: Greg Stohr reports that “Life Sentences For Young Murderers Limited By High Court“; “Arizona Immigration Law Partially Struck By High Court“; and “Comcast Gets U.S. High Court Hearing On Consumer Lawsuit.”

Greg Stohr and Julie Bykowicz report that “Corporate Campaign Spending Rights Affirmed By High Court.”

And Linda Sandler reports that “Madoff Investor Appeal Won’t Be Heard By Supreme Court.”

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini and Jonathan Stempel report that “High Court upholds key part of Arizona immigration law.”

And Vicini also has articles headlined “Supreme Court rejects Montana campaign money limits” and “US top court won’t hear Argentine debt default case.”

“Health care ruling expected on Thursday”: The Associated Press has this report.

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 today granted review in ten cases.

You can access the 5-to-4 per curiam ruling in American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, No. 11-1179, at this link. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissent, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined.

And Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a statement respecting the denial of the petitions for writs of certiorari in Mount Soledad Memorial Assn. v. Trunk, No. 11-998.

The Court today issued two rulings in three argued cases.

1. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Miller v. Alabama, No. 10-9646. Justice Breyer issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. Justice Thomas also issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Scalia joined. And Justice Alito also issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Scalia joined. You can access the oral argument via this link. This ruling also decided the separately argued case of Jackson v. Hobbs, No. 10-9647. You can access the oral argument in Jackson via this link.

2. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court in Arizona v. United States, No. 11-182. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito each issued an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Kagan did not take part in this ruling. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court: No more life without parole for juveniles“; “High court rejects part of Arizona immigration law“; “Court rejects corporate campaign spending limits“; “High court won’t take up San Diego cross dispute“; “Court: Can EPA regulate mud from logging roads?“; and “Court won’t hear Md. redistricting challenge.”

The Court has announced that its remaining rulings in argued cases will be delivered on Thursday, June 28th.

“What happens when the court itself becomes the headline?” Dahlia Lithwick has this post online at Slate.

“Countdown To The Supreme Court’s Ruling On Health Care”: This audio segment featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on yesterday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Weekend Edition Sunday.”

“Lyle Denniston, icon of Supreme Court press corps, on health care case and being older than the justices”: At “The Ticket” site of Yahoo! News, Liz Goodwin has this blog post.

“Health care ruling looms as high court meets”: The Associated Press has this report.

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has an article headlined “What To Look For In Court’s Historic Health-Care Ruling.”