“HB1228 passes House, heads to governor”: Danielle Kloap and Gavin Lesnick of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette have a news update that begins, “Arkansas’s Religion Freedom Restoration Act was approved by the state’s House of Representatives on Tuesday in a final vote before it heads to Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s desk.”

“U.S. appeals court overturns death sentence of California man”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

Today’s decision contains a great deal of secrecy concerning the details of the case, and the decision doesn’t reveal the habeas petitioner’s actual name. Even the date and location of the Ninth Circuit’s oral argument of the appeal have been redacted.

“Report finds U.S. attorney staffers had suspicions about online commenting by prosecutors, but no facts”: Andy Grimm of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this report.

“Health providers’ stand could invite other execution methods”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Spotlight on AG Kathleen Kane now shifts to would-be prosecutor, Risa Vetri Ferman”: Wallace McKelvey of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has this report.

“How Indiana’s RFRA differs from federal version”: Kristine Guerra and Tim Evans of The Indianapolis Star have this report.

“Maine attorney to argue gay marriage issue before U.S. Supreme Court; Mary Bonauto, of Portland, was selected from a field of lawyers to represent gay couples in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee on April 28, to argue for allowing them to marry and have their marriages recognized in their states”: Scott Dolan of The Portland Press Herald has this report.

And Cheryl Wetzstein of The Washington Times has a report headlined “Gay rights pioneer Bonauto to argue Supreme Court marriage case; Won the first, landmark case in Massachusetts in 2003.”

“Conservative leader lobbies Texas court on gay marriage”: Chuck Lindell of The Austin American-Statesman has a news update that begins, “A Texas conservative leader has launched a rare, perhaps unprecedented, public lobbying campaign urging justices on the Texas Supreme Court to uphold the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. Steven Hotze, president of the Conservative Republicans of Texas, supplied supporters with the work emails of the court’s nine Republican justices as part of his campaign to encourage a quick ruling on a long-pending case involving a gay Dallas couple who married out of state but sought a divorce in Texas.”

You can access the web page discussed in the article at this link.

“Teva, Nautilus, and Change Without Change”: Law professor Jason Rantanen has posted this essay online at SSRN.

“Supreme Court Weighs Overruling a 1964 Patent Decision”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Spider-Man toy maker gets caught in Supreme Court’s web.”

And Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has a report headlined “Supreme Court mulls lengthy patent deals in spat over Spider-Man toy; Inventor wants court to reconsider a 50-year-old rule that limits patent payouts.”

“PA Supreme Court rejects AG Kane’s bid to end criminal probe”: Craig R. McCoy of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this news update.

Paula Reed Ward of The/ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a news update headlined “Pa. Supreme Court upholds decision to appoint special prosecutor to investigate AG Kane.”

Brad Bumsted of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has a news update headlined “Pa. Supreme Court upholds special prosecutor investigating AG Kane.”

And Wallace McKelvey of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania reports that “Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility of charges.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of an opinion announcing the judgment of the court, two concurring opinions (here and here), and a dissenting opinion.

“Tsarnaev defense rests in Marathon bombing trial”: Milton J. Valencia, Kevin Cullen, and Patricia Wen of The Boston Globe have this news update.

And Laurel J. Sweet of The Boston Herald has a news update headlined “Defense rests in Tsarnaev case, closing arguments Monday.”

“Pregnancy and work: Supreme triangulation.” Steven Mazie has this post at the “Democracy in America” blog of The Economist.

“Killing Time: Will the Supreme Court let Louisiana execute a man who says he’s intellectually disabled?” Mark Joseph Stern has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Supreme Court weighs Spider-Man toy patent fight”: Sam Hananel of The Associated Press has this report.

And Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court hesitant to extend Spider-Man toy royalties.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., No. 13-720.

“What Do You Mean, I Can’t Sue My State?” Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.

“Supreme Court bars judges from setting Medicaid rates”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court says medical providers can’t sue states over Medicaid funding.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Hospitals Can’t Sue Over Medicaid Reimbursement, Court Says.”

“If you believe enough, can you invalidate a patent? Supreme Court to decide; A patent case that could seep into copyright, file-sharing, and DVDs.” Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has this report.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 13-896.

“Quince blazed trail to the Florida Supreme Court; Peggy Quince is the first African-American woman to serve on Florida Supreme Court”: Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“Gay-rights pioneer to argue Supreme Court marriage case”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Gay marriage pioneer chosen to argue Supreme Court case.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Washington Bureau reports that “Attorneys tapped for Supreme Court same-sex marriage argument.”

Todd Spangler of The Detroit Free Press reports that “Lawyer picked to argue DeBoer case at Supreme Court; Civil rights expert and genius grant recipient will fight Michigan same-sex marriage ban when case is argued in April.”

Oralandar Brand-Williams of The Detroit News reports that “LGBT rights attorney to argue DeBoer v. Snyder case.”

Joan Biskupic of Reuters reports that “Prominent gay rights advocate to argue landmark U.S. marriage case.”

Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog” has a post titled “Lawyers for same-sex marriage plea named.”

And Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed reports that “Marriage Advocates Set For Supreme Court Arguments On April 28; Mary Bonauto, longtime marriage equality advocate, will argue for marriage equality; Douglas Hallward-Driemeier will argue in support of marriage recognition claims.”

“Ky: No one can marry same sex, ban not biased.” This front page article appears in today’s edition of The Louisville Courier-Journal.

And The Detroit News reports that “Michigan AG urges justices to uphold gay nuptials ban.”

“California’s death row, with no executions in sight, runs out of room”: The Los Angeles Times has this report.

From the guy who brought you the 28-day period in which to file post-judgment motions under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: You never know what you might find if you plumb the depths of the minutes of the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (h/t Carl Malamud).

On a related note, tomorrow the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee will hold its long-awaited and oft-rescheduled public hearing to receive additional comments on the proposal to reduce the maximum word length of federal appellate briefs from 14,000 words to 12,500 words, a reduction of greater than ten percent.

I won’t be able to attend tomorrow’s hearing in Washington, DC in person, but I look forward to posting and linking to the reports of others on the hearing and also linking to the transcript of the hearing once it becomes available online. Either tonight or tomorrow morning, I will publish a post linking to this blog’s extensive earlier coverage of the FRAP word limit reduction proposal.

On April 23 and 24, 2015, the Appellate Rules Committee will hold its next meeting, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania of all places. I am planning to attend that meeting, at which the FRAP word limit reduction proposal and the large number of comments received in opposition thereto likely will receive further consideration from the committee, which originally approved the word limit reduction proposal for publication by the narrowest of margins.

In the April 2015 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “SCOTUS to review a handful of cases on the rights of same-sex couples.”

“Constitution Check: Did the Founders want term limits for Supreme Court Justices?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“The Harry Reid Legacy That Could Radically Transform America”: Sahil Kapur of TPM DC has this report today. According to Kapur, “[I]n the long-term, the former boxer who became known for his iron-fisted rule over the Senate as majority leader may be remembered most for deploying the so-called ‘nuclear option’ on Nov. 21, 2013, to abolish the filibuster for most nominations, and arguably setting the stage for killing the 60-vote threshold entirely.”

“John Roberts just inspired the trolliest essay in law review history”: Dara Lind has this post online today at Vox. My earlier coverage appears at this link.

Access online today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in an argued case: Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court in part and an opinion on behalf of himself, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito in part in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc., No. 14-15. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. And Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Elena Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court sides with Idaho in Medicaid pay dispute.”

“Religious Protection Laws, Once Seen as Shield, Now Strike Some as Cudgel”: Erik Eckholm has this news analysis in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Scalia Admits He’ll Never Read the Whole Record for a Life-and-Death Case He’s About to Decide”: Dahlia Lithwick has this post online at Slate.

“US files appeal of judge’s hold on immigration action”: The Associated Press has this report on the brief for appellants that the federal government filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

I have posted the federal government’s brief for appellants at this link. The brief contains 13,901 words, which is 1,401 words larger than would be allowed if the draconian proposal to reduce the maximum allowable brief length permitted under the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is enacted.

“Justices Hear Arguments on Intellectual Disability in Death Penalty Case”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “In death row case, Supreme Court looks for narrow ruling.”

The Baton Rouge Advocate reports that “U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in killing of off-duty Baton Rouge Police Department Corporal Betty Smothers.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument analysis: The record’s the thing — unfortunately.”

You can access at this link the transcript of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Brumfield v. Cain, No. 13-1433.