Programming note: For the second morning in a row, an appeal on which I have worked is being argued in the Pa. Superior Court. As a result, additional posts will appear here this afternoon.

At some point this morning, “Concurring Opinions” is scheduled to post the next installment of its ongoing interview with Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner.

“Should Judges Be Allowed to Court Campaign Donors? That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court will decide in a case that could make judicial elections even more like other political races.” Governing.com has this report.

In Utah, the living can now marry the dead: The Salt Lake Tribune has an update headlined “Utah court reinstates posthumous marriage; Ogden man’s cousins challenged declaration that he had a common law marriage.”

And The Deseret News has an update headlined “Utah Supreme Court reinstates Ogden woman’s marriage to dead man.”

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

“Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice who retired amid scandal collects $11,000 a month”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Supreme Court’s Missing Man; Plaintiff Whose Case Was Accepted by High Court in Rare Move Has Disappeared”: Brent Kendall and Colleen Wilson will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Supreme Court hears arguments on diesel tax”: USA Today has this report.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Alabama Dept. of Revenue v. CSX Transp., Inc., No. 13-553.

“Examining Some of the Risks and Benefits of Appellate E-Filing”: This month’s installment of my “Upon Further Review” column appears in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

You can freely access the full text of this month’s column via Google.

“3rd Circ. Affirms Revival Of Genaera Investor Suit”: Cara Salvatore of Law360.com has this report (subscription required for full access) today on a case in which I served as appellate counsel for plaintiff.

Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied defendants’ petitions for panel and en banc rehearing. I previously linked to the rehearing petitions and my client’s court-requested answer in opposition thereto in a post you can access here.

“How Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor beat the odds”: This interview with Joan Biskupic appeared recently on AMERICA with Jorge Ramos.

“When corporations go to SCOTUS, class counsel turn to this man”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

“Court to weigh challenge in suit on Israel attacks”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Denver nuns say birth-control rules violate their religious beliefs”: This article appears in today’s edition of The Denver Post.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has made available online the audio of yesterday’s three related oral arguments via this link.

“Supreme Court Rejects Jurors’ Testimony on Deliberations”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

The Argus Leader of Sioux Falls, South Dakota has a news update headlined “U.S. Supreme Court rules on S.D. crash.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Justices reject claim of juror dishonesty.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Warger v. Shauers, No. 13-517.

“Supreme Court Rules Against Worker Pay for Security Waits at Amazon Warehouses”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court rules Amazon doesn’t have to pay for after-hours time in security lines.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Workers lose fair-pay case over hours spent in security screenings.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Justices say security screening after work isn’t paid time.”

Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Supreme Court Stops Amazon Workers’ Suit About Overtime; High Court Says Warehouse Employees Not Entitled to Pay While Undergoing Security Screenings.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

Sam Hananel of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: No pay for Amazon warehouse security checks.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court rules no worker pay for security screening.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Amazon Warehouse Workers Lose at Top Court on Extra Pay.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion analysis: No overtime pay for after-work security check.”

And in commentary, online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Supreme Court Doesn’t Understand Wage Labor.”

Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, No. 13-433. And Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a concurring opinion in which Justice Elena Kagan joined.

Programming note: On both Tuesday and Wednesday mornings of this week, appeals on which I have worked are being argued in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. As a result, both tomorrow and Wednesday, new posts will not appear here until the afternoon.

On Tuesday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue one or more opinions in argued cases. Any new opinions can be accessed via this link once the Court posts them online.

“Actors Guild Gets Behind Copyrights for Some Performers; With nods to the many actors who played ‘Batman’ and the actress who plays many roles on ‘Orphan Black,’ the guild weighs in on a controversial case before a federal appeals court”: Eriq Gardner has this post today at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

“From Lawyer To Blogger To Novelist: An Interview With David Lat, Author Of Supreme Ambitions.” David Lat has this post — in which he interviews himself — today at “Above the Law.”

“Colorado’s Interstate Tax Law Gets Harsh Review At Supreme Court Reception”: Daniel Fisher has this post at Forbes.com.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Direct Marketing Assn. v. Brohl, No. 13-1032.

“Supreme Court Hears Cases on Internet Shopping and Railroads”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

In Tuesday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Court considers whether Amtrak’s self-created standards are federal ‘regulations.’”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Justices weigh Amtrak’s power over nation’s railroads.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Amtrak’s On-Time Metrics Questioned at U.S. Supreme Court.”

And online at Bloomberg VIew, law professor Noah Feldman has a post titled “What Amtrak Has in Common With Government.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Department of Transportation v. Association of American Railroads, No. 13-1080.

“Argument analysis: Decide or remand? That’s the question.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Judges hear arguments over NSA surveillance”: The Associated Press has this report on a case argued today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

When the oral argument audio becomes available online, I will link to it. For now, you can view the video of the oral argument on YouTube at this link starting at the 38-minute and 50-second mark.

“Religious nonprofits challenge health law”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “In the latest religious challenge to the federal health care law, faith-based organizations that object to covering birth control in their employee health plans argued in federal appeals court Monday that the government hasn’t gone far enough to ensure they don’t have to violate their beliefs.”

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit heard argument in these three related cases today.

“Justices May Review Begging Law (and Ex-Colleague’s Opinion)”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Ninth Circuit rejects constitutional challenge to Arizona’s “admission on motion” rule, which gives bar admission preferences to attorneys licensed to practice law in a state that gives similar preferences to lawyers licensed in Arizona: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Justices seem divided over Amtrak regulatory role”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Madoff trustee loses appeal on clawbacks”: Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“Chewing over the ‘power bar’: Biskupic discusses major study of the Supreme Court bar’s influence on certiorari.” Eric Citron has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

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

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High court rejects BP appeal of spill settlement.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court rejects BP challenge to Gulf spill settlement.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “BP Rejected by U.S. Supreme Court in Challenge to Gulf Payments.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court won’t reopen settled BP oil spill case.”

“On legal education & legal scholarship — More questions for Judge Posner”: Ronald K.L. Collins has this post today at “Concurring Opinions.”

“Special Report: At U.S. court of last resort, handful of lawyers dominate docket.” Today, Joan Biskupic, Janet Roberts, and John Shiffman of Reuters have a three-part series. Part one, whose headline appears above, can be accessed here.

Part two is headlined “Elite law firms spin gold from getting cases before Supreme Court.”

And part three is headlined “In ever-clubbier bar, 8 men emerge as Supreme Court confidants.”

You can access the entire series — titled “The Echo Chamber: A small group of lawyers and its outsized influence at the U.S. Supreme Court” — including additional sidebars and features via this link.

“When Is a Facebook Rant a ‘True Threat?'” Kenneth Jost had this post yesterday at his blog, “Jost On Justice.”

“Judges to hear arguments over NSA surveillance”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A panel of federal appeals judges in Seattle is considering an Idaho woman’s challenge to the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of cellphone information.”

Once the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit makes the audio of this oral argument available online, I will link to it.

“Does an Innocent Man Have the Right to Be Exonerated? In the 1980s, Larry Youngblood was wrongfully imprisoned for raping a 10-year-old boy; The way the Supreme Court handled his case had lasting consequences.” Marc Bookman has this lengthy article online at The Atlantic.

“San Francisco’s powerful U.S. appeals court gets new ‘Big Sky’ leader”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has this report.

“Military appeals court to hear Kansas HIV case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A Kansas airman accused of aggravated assault for exposing multiple sex partners to HIV at swinger parties in Wichita will have his appeal heard this week before the nation’s highest military court.”