“‘As singular a failure as I’ve seen in the history of the Supreme Court’? McGinnis on Windsor, not Shelby County.” Today at his “walshslaw” blog, law professor Kevin C. Walsh has a post that begins, “Even Totenberg nods.”

“The Supreme Writer on the Court: The Case for Roberts.” Ross Guberman has this guest blog post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Privacy Group to Ask Supreme Court to Stop N.S.A.’s Phone Spying Program”: James Risen will have this article in Monday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Confirming Phillips for the Tenth Circuit”: Law professor Carl Tobias has this op-ed online today at The Casper (Wyo.) Star-Tribune.

And in today’s edition of The Sun Journal of Lewiston, Maine, Douglas Rooks has an op-ed entitled “Why is Susan Collins backing Grassley move on appeals court judges?”

“State abortion bills get national attention”: Daniel Strauss has this blog post online at The Hill.

“BP to challenge oil spill settlement payments Monday in 5th Circuit”: The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court to hear dispute over BP settlement.”

“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Out from under the Voting Rights Act.” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.

“2 years after immigration laws, Ga., Ala., stable”: The Associated Press has this report.

“In Secret, Court Vastly Broadens Powers of N.S.A.” Eric Lichtblau will have this front page article in Sunday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Gay marriage ruling already in use in other cases”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

“Guantanamo reports dip in number of hunger strikers”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this report.

And in somewhat related news, The Ottawa Citizen reports today that “Omar Khadr assaulted at Edmonton prison.”

“Young Murderers Await Legislature’s Punishment Decision”: Brandi Grissom of The Texas Tribune has this report.

“Is Ruth Bader Ginsburg too old to be a Supreme Court justice?” Michael McGough has this essay online today at The Los Angeles Times.

“U.S. defends secrecy of unique surveillance court”: David Ingram of Reuters has a report that begins, “The Obama administration on Friday urged a secret U.S. court that oversees surveillance programs to reject a request by a civil liberties group to see court opinions used to underpin a massive phone records database.”

And online at The Los Angeles Times, Michael McGough has an essay titled “We need a better way to pick FISA court judges.”

“Federal judges side with Lexington again on Confederate flag ban; Three-judge panel agrees with U.S. District Court ruling that Lexington was within its rights to ban all non-government flag displays from city light poles”: The Roanoke Times has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal appeals court panel sides with Lexington ban on Confederate flags on city light poles.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“After Ruling, States Rush to Enact Voting Laws”: Michael Cooper will have this article in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times.

“The big enchilada: Are same-sex marriage bans now illegal? Parsing the Justices’ words in United States v. Windsor.” Roger Parloff of Fortune has this blog post today.

“Lending Discrimination Case at Supreme Court in Settlement Talks”: Carter Dougherty of Bloomberg News has a report that begins, “The Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey, and a local citizens’ group are seeking to settle a dispute now before the U.S. Supreme Court that threatens to undercut the Obama administration’s crackdown on alleged discrimination in lending.”

Access online the contents of the June 2013 issue of The Yale Law Journal: This issue is all about Gideon, and you can access it at this link.

“Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?” Ezra Klein has this entry today at The Washington Post’s “Wonkblog.”

“Power from the people: Does the Supreme Court’s gay-marriage ruling threaten direct democracy?” This article appears in the July 6, 2013 issue of The Economist.

“Appeals court rules California healthcare limits invalid”: Dan Levine of Reuters has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Friday ruled invalid a California law that eliminated coverage of some healthcare services for the poor, including adult dental, podiatry, optometry and chiropractic care.”

Update: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“California convict gets another chance to escape death row”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Washington Bureau has this report.

“Whose Term Was It? A Look Back At The Supreme Court.” Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“The Supreme Court’s Libertarian Moment?” Ilya Shapiro has this blog entry online at The Huffington Post.

“Obama’s new Guantanamo envoy begins work, tours detention center”: Hannah Allam of McClatchy Washington Bureau has this report.

“F.D.A. Rule Could Open Generic Drug Makers to Suits”: Today’s edition of The New York Times contains an article that begins, “The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday signaled its intention to permit generic drug makers to make changes to their safety labels, a move that could open the door to lawsuits against generic drug companies for the first time since a Supreme Court decision barred such suits two years ago.”

“Death-penalty trials create big costs for taxpayers”: Michael Kiefer has this article today in The Arizona Republic.

“In other words, a person can use a passport as conclusive evidence that she is a U.S. citizen only if she first proves that she is a U.S. citizen.” So observes Circuit Judge D. Brooks Smith in his dissent from an interesting ruling that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued yesterday.

“Reversal Didn’t Soothe Holdout Juror Qualms”: Courthouse News Service has this report on a per curiam order, accompanied by two interesting concurring opinions, that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday in a habeas case that returned to the Ninth Circuit on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court.

It is also worth noting that Chief Judge Alex Kozinski chose to have his concurring opinion appear after the concurring opinion of co-panelist Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt.

“Maryland’s new chief judge lauded as forthright, diplomatic; Hampden woman went from schoolroom to courtroom”: This front page article appears today in The Baltimore Sun.

And today’s edition of The Washington Post contains an article headlined “Mary Ellen Barbera named first woman to head Maryland’s highest court.”

“Supreme Court’s Ginsburg vows to resist pressure to retire”: Joan Biskupic of Reuters has this report.

“U.S. Court of Appeals upholds Fruitland man’s hate crime conviction”: The Farmington (N.M.) Daily Times has a news update that begins, “A U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the hate crime conviction of a Fruitland man who participated in a branding of a mentally disabled Native American in Farmington in 2010.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit at this link.

At issue in the case was whether the U.S. Congress had the power to enact the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which among other things makes it a felony to physically attack a person because of that person’s race. The unanimous three-judge panel rejected the defendant’s constitutional challenge, holding that “Congress rationally determined that racially motivated violence is a badge or incident of slavery against which it may legislate through its power to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment.”

“Using Algorithmic Attribution Techniques to Determine Authorship in Unsigned Judicial Opinions”: Last Sunday, the Stanford Technology Law Review posted online this article.

The article’s syllabus begins, “This Article proposes a novel and provocative analysis of judicial opinions that are published without indicating individual authorship. Our approach provides an unbiased, quantitative, and computer scientific answer to a problem that has long plagued legal commentators.”

“Housing discrimination case could settle before top court rules”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has a report that begins, “For the second time in two years, a case before the U.S. Supreme Court that could limit housing discrimination claims might be resolved before the justices have a chance to rule on it.”