“Utah to appeal polygamy ruling in ‘Sister Wives’ case”: Dennis Romboy of The Deseret News has this report.

And The Associated Press reports that “Utah to appeal ruling in ‘Sister Wives’ case.”

“U.S. Appeals Court Orders Disclosure of Secrets in Chevron Oil Pollution Case”: Paul M. Barrett of Bloomberg Businessweek has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Ruth Bader Ginsburg Would Probably Be Confirmed Today”: Harry Enten has this post today at FiveThirtyEight.

And Jonathan Turley, at his blog, today has this post that criticizes aspects of Justice Ginsburg’s Elle interview.

“Should Obsolete Justifications for a 1952 Law Still Hold Legal Force Today? SCOTUS May Decide.” Damon Root has this post today at Reason.com’s “Hit & Run” blog.

“Texas, Louisiana same-sex marriage cases linked”: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post that begins, “Two conflicting federal trial court rulings on same-sex marriage — one in Texas in favor, one in Louisiana against — will be heard by the same panel of appellate judges, but in separate hearings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ordered on Thursday.”

“With Holder Leaving, Verrilli Is Back in the Spotlight”: Janet Adamy
and Mark H. Anderson have this post at WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog.

“Justice Anthony Kennedy talks about the Bill of Rights at National Constitution Center”: The “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center has this post today.

“Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report today.

“Technical glitches contributed to delay in Markel case”: Sean Rossman of The Tallahassee Democrat has this news update.

Programming note: On Thursday, I will be in Washington, DC to attend The Heritage Foundation’s “Supreme Court Preview of the 2014 Term” featuring Michael Carvin and Paul Clement.

I am also looking forward to meeting Michelle Olsen, of the excellent Appellate Daily Twitter feed, who will likewise be attending the event.

As a result, additional posts will not appear here until Thursday evening. In the interim, appellate-related retweets are likely appear at the How Appealing Twitter feed.

“Court Returns Inquiry Into Walker’s Finances to Wisconsin”: Monica Davey will have this article in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.

My earlier coverage of today’s Seventh Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Retirement Dissent”: Amy Davidson has this blog post online at The New Yorker.

“Don’t Execute Those We Tortured”: In Thursday’s edition of The New York Times, law professor Jonathan Hafetz will have an op-ed that begins, “After years of legal battles, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, will finally be put on trial before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, though a trial date hasn’t yet been set.”

“Economists’ arguments against Obamacare lawsuits backfire; New taxes and government subsidies are worse than a bad health care bill”: Jonathan H. Adler and Michael F. Cannon have this op-ed online at The Washington Times.

“Judge Denies BP’s Request to Recoup Overpayments to Oil Spill Victims”: John Schwartz will have this article in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.

“The return of Citizens United: The plain language of the First Amendment confuses another federal judge.” This editorial will appear in Thursday’s edition of The Washington Times.

“Book Review: ‘The Case Against the Supreme Court’ by Erwin Chemerinsky; Earl Warren used to interrupt lawyers focused on legal particulars with questions like: ‘Yes, yes, yes, but is it . . . right? Is it good?'” In Thursday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Terry Eastland will have this review of law professor Erwin Chemerinsky‘s new book, “The Case Against the Supreme Court.”

You can freely access the full text of the review via Google.

“Charlotte to host court showdown on voting laws”: The Charlotte Observer has an article that begins, “A three-judge federal panel meeting in Charlotte on Thursday may soon decide how North Carolinians vote in November, potentially impacting a midterm election that carries national importance.”

“Porn-peeping federal workers rarely face time or attendance fraud charges; Privacy interests shield government employees’ identities from public disclosure”: Jim McElhatton will have this article in Thursday’s edition of The Washington Times reporting on records obtained from Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General under the Freedom of Information Act.

“Court Rulings Mean Judges Will Get an Extra $1B in Pay and Benefits; CBO adds up costs of Congress’s failed efforts to stop judicial salary increases”: Billy House of National Journal has this report today.

“Stevens Says Ford Was Behind Crucial Affirmative Action Brief”: Adam Liptak has this post today at the “First Draft” blog of The New York Times.

“Second-Best Stare Decisis”: Online at SSRN, law professor Randy J. Kozel has posted online an article whose abstract begins, “If Supreme Court Justices differ over the proper interpretation of the Constitution, can they nevertheless agree about the treatment of constitutional precedent?” (Via “Legal Theory Blog.”)

“Court overturns halt to John Doe probe into Walker’s campaign”: Jason Stein of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has this news update reporting on a ruling that Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

And The Associated Press reports that “Federal court lifts injunction in Walker case.”

Meanwhile, at his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen is officially having a very busy afternoon.

Update: In other coverage, The Wisconsin State Journal has a news update headlined “Federal court lifts injunction against investigation into Scott Walker, conservative groups.”

And Reuters reports that “Appeals court overturns ruling that halted Wisconsin campaign probe.”

“Roberts at 10: A Look at the First Decade of John Roberts’s Tenure as Chief Justice.” The Constitutional Accountability Center has today posted online what the organization describes as the first introductory chapter of this year-long project. Brianne Gorod is the author of the chapter posted online today.

“Breaking: 6th Circuit Upholds Federal Court Order Extending Ohio Early Voting: Analysis.” At his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen has just begun writing this post about a ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued late this afternoon.

In early news coverage, The Columbus Dispatch reports that “Ohioans can start early voting Tuesday, appeals court rules.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court upholds Ohio ruling on early voting.”

Update: Reuters reports that “Appeals court clears way for early voting in Ohio.”

“$10B ruling against Philip Morris goes back to Illinois high court”: Ameet Sachdev of The Chicago Tribune has this news update.

Update: In other coverage, Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Illinois top court to review Altria $10.1 bln cigarette verdict.”

“Penalty against Judge Colleen O’Toole upheld, but Supreme Court finds part of rule governing judicial candidates is unconstitutional”: The Cleveland Plain Dealer has a news update that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday narrowed the scope of a rule that limits what judicial candidates can say when they run for office after holding the rule was, in part, unconstitutional.”

And Court News Ohio — the news bureau of the Ohio judicial branch — reports that “Part of Judicial Conduct Rule Unconstitutional, Violates Free Speech.”

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

“Above the Law gets more Appealing”: Jonathan H. Adler has this kind post today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

And in case you missed it, last night I had this post linking to an item in The Green Bag’s new issue titled “Bashman and the Judges.”

Update: In other coverage of note, at his “TaxProf Blog,” Paul Caron has a post titled “How Appealing Partners With Above the Law.”

“BP Told It Can’t Claw Back Oil-Spill Damage Overpayments”: Bloomberg News has this report.

In earlier coverage, The Times-Picayune of New Orleans reported in June 2014 that “BP seeks repayment on ‘inflated’ oil spill payouts.”

“The Satanic Lawsuit: Do Satanists have religious rights?” Joey Peters of The Sante Fe Reporter has an article that begins, “An inmate at Western New Mexico Correctional Facility is suing the state for allegedly infringing on his freedom to practice his religion. His religion? Satanic worship.”

You can view the pro se complaint initiating suit at this link.

“Obamacare on Appeal: Statutory Construction of This Politically Charged Question Will Inevitably Be Called Judicial Activism.” Derek Stikeleather has this post today at the “Maryland Appellate Blog.”

“ADF asks US Supreme Court to uphold freedom of churches to meet in NYC public schools”: Alliance Defending Freedom filed this petition for writ of certiorari today in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The organization’s news release reporting on the filing can be accessed here.

“Supreme Court advised to delay taking on water war case; US Solicitor general asks justices to wait for corps to complete work”: Jeff Gill has this front page article in today’s edition of The Times of Gainesville, Georgia.

As compared to today, where everything is just hunky-dory: Today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Scott Bomboy has a post titled “Drama, controversy marked the first Supreme Court justices.”

“Famous Supreme Court Plaintiffs: a Quiz; Can you recognize Dred Scott? Jane Roe? Ernesto Miranda?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence quiz online today at Slate.