“15 states urge Supreme Court to uphold gay marriage bans”: The Associated Press has this report.

“9/11 insurers can’t snag al-Qaida funds held in Chicago, court rules”: Kim Janssen of The Chicago Sun-Times has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court says alleged al-Qaida backer’s money belongs to gov, can’t go to 9/11 insurers.”

You can access today’s ruling of a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link.

“9th Circuit rules Netflix isn’t subject to disability law; Are websites ‘public accommodations’? Federal courts have split on the question.” Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has this report on an unpublished, non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

“The Supreme Court Business with Sidley Austin’s Chair”: Bloomberg BNA has posted this video online.

“What Prince Charles Has In Common with Hillary Clinton”: Amy Davidson has this post online today at The New Yorker about two matters that have appellate components (see here and here).

“Right Side of the Law: Eugene Volokh’s Global Influence; The wunderkind-turned-law professor is that L.A. anomaly: an influential conservative blogger.” Maarten De Boer had this post yesterday at the “CityThink” blog of Los Angeles magazine.

“CA Appellate Report Blog wins on appeal”: Ben Shatz has this post today at his “Southern California Appellate News” blog about an unpublished ruling that California’s Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District issued today upholding the dismissal of a lawsuit against law professor Shaun Martin and the University of San Diego arising from a post that Martin made at his “California Appellate Report” blog.

“Washington Supreme Court: Public employee names are not private during investigation.” The Associated Press has this report on a 5-to-4 ruling that the Supreme Court of Washington State issued today.

“Ohio Supreme Court Justice talks police, courts with Miami students”: This article appears in today’s edition of The Journal-News of Hamilton, Ohio.

“Fla. High Court Keeps Big Tobacco Open To Punitive Damages”: Carolina Bolado of Law360.com has a report (subscription required for full access) that begins, “The Florida Supreme Court kept punitive damages within the grasp of many Engle progeny plaintiffs when it ruled Thursday that they do not have to show individual reliance on Big Tobacco’s statements in the 12 years leading up to the filing of the suit in order to prove fraudulent concealment claims.”

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

“The Originalist: A new play — superb in its acting, muddled in its writing — about Justice Antonin Scalia.” Jonathan Keim has this essay online today at National Review.

“Two Pretexts Walk Into a Bar: The arguments against gay marriage can’t be reconciled with the arguments for religious freedom acts.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Election 2015: Now it’s voters’ turn in low-profile Supreme Court race.” Dee J. Hall of The Wisconsin State Journal has this report.

And Steven Elbow of The Capital Times reports that “Wisconsin Supreme Court election spending ratchets up.”

“After Nazi Plunder, A Quest To Bring The ‘Woman In Gold’ Home”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Lawyers Resist Plan to Trim Length of Appeals Briefs”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has a Supreme Court brief (subscription required for full access) that begins, “Forcing lawyers to write shorter briefs is not the solution to the problems federal appeals court judges have with outsized filings, an advisory panel was told on Wednesday.”

And Michael Macagnone of Law360.com has an article headlined “Attys Resist Proposal To Shrink Appellate Brief Limits” (subscription required for full access) that begins, “Several appellate attorney organizations on Monday blasted a judicial rule-making body’s proposals to shorten appellate brief lengths, saying the plans would hurt advocacy efforts in a swath of complex areas including Native American law, antitrust disputes and challenges to federal agency activities.”

The full text of Mauro’s article suggests that no testimony in favor of the proposed FRAP briefing word limit reduction was received at yesterday’s Appellate Rules and Forms Public Hearing in Washington, DC. When the transcript of the hearing becomes available, I will link to it.

Lastly, at the “Appellate Advocacy Blog,” David R. Cleveland has a post titled “Federal Appellate Rulemaking on Brief Word Counts.”

“In Iowa, Ted Cruz denounces gay marriage, lauds Indiana religious liberty bill”: Todd J. Gillman of The Dallas Morning News has this blog post.

“When Liberals and Conservatives Agree on Women’s Rights: It’s not as uncommon as you think.” Law professor Naomi Schoenbaum has this essay online at Politico Magazine.

“Giving Up on the Supreme Court Too Soon”: Kenneth Jost had this post Sunday at his blog, “Jost On Justice.”

“Constitution Check: Who has a right to speak up in the Supreme Court?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“The Problem With Funding Government Through Fines: A budget shortfall at the Nevada Supreme Court underlines a broader fiscal quandary.” Matt Ford has this essay online today at The Atlantic.