“Quebec town can’t have prayers at council meetings, Supreme Court rules”: The Toronto Globe and Mail has this report.

And The Montreal Gazette reports that “Cities dropping prayers, but politicians in Quebec City stick to crucifix in legislature.”

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

“If the separation of powers means anything, it must mean that the prosecutor isn’t allowed to define the crimes he gets to enforce.” So writes Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch in a lengthy dissent today from the Tenth Circuit’s denial of rehearing en banc in a SORNA case implicating a split with a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

“Appeals Court Agrees to Review Sirius XM’s Challenge Over Pre-1972 Music; The 2nd Circuit will take up the issue of whether New York protects the public performance of older songs — and whether that violates the U.S. Constitution”: Eriq Gardner has this post today at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

“Dismembered Protections: These new abortion bans may be the most dangerous yet.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The 2nd Circuit can’t agree on reach of civil RICO. Next stop SCOTUS?” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight today has a report that begins, “If there was any doubt about the complexity of applying the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, it was resolved Monday by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a case called European Community v. RJR Nabisco.”

My earlier coverage of the Second Circuit’s recent order denying rehearing en banc, and the opinions concurring in and dissenting therefrom, can be accessed here.

“Radio Connects North Dakota Residents Divided On Gay Rights”: This audio segment appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Supreme Court Has Opportunity To Halt Lawsuits By Uninjured Plaintiffs”: Rich Samp of Washington Legal Foundation has this post today at Forbes.com.

“Chief Justice Roberts reports for jury duty in a Maryland court”: Robert Barnes and Dan Morse of The Washington Post have this news update.

“What to watch for in federal court hearing on EPA carbon rules”: Reuters has this report.

“The Death Penalty Deserves the Death Penalty”: Lincoln Caplan has this post online today at The New Yorker.

“The Fifth Circuit Jumps the Non-Article III Shark”: Steve Vladeck has this post today at “PrawfsBlawg.”

And today at the “Maryland Appellate Blog,” Steve Klepper has a post titled “The Judicial Policy Implications of Reckless Driving on Federal Land.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s divided Fifth Circuit ruling appears at this link.

“Superior Court panel starts session in Pottsville”: The Republican Herald of Pottsville, Pennsylvania has this report, along with an article headlined “Superior Court panel hears 3 county cases.”

“Appeals court backs Wal-Mart on barring stockholder proposal”: The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has this report.

The Washington Times reports that “Wal-Mart wins gun-sales case against investors who want to bar such purchases.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that “Court Lets Wal-Mart Block Investor Proposal on Gun Sales; New York church had challenged sales of semiautomatic rifles.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

And Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Wal-Mart defeats bid for shareholder vote on gun sales.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Third Circuit order appears at this link.

“Proposed Maryland Rule Heads Wrong Way on Unpublished Opinions”: David R. Cleveland has this post at the “Appellate Advocacy Blog.”

“Federal Circuit takes on En Banc Patent Exhaustion Case to Examine Impact of Kirtsaeng and Quanta”: Dennis Crouch has this post at “Patently-O.”

“San Jose takes fight against MLB to U.S. Supreme Court”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has this report.

“Preview on same-sex marriage — Part III, Supporting the couples”: Lyle Denniston has this post — the third in a four-part series — today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Ignorance of the Law: A recent Supreme Court ruling allows the kind of traffic stop that led to Walter Scott’s death.” Cristian Farias has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.