“Supreme Court hears historic same-sex marriage arguments”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has an updated report that begins, “Pivotal Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy asked skeptical questions of both sides Tuesday as the high court heard historic arguments over the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry.”

“Federal Appeals Court to Scrutinize Voter ID Law”: Jim Malewitz of The Texas Tribune has a report that begins, “Texas’ voter ID law faces a fresh round of legal scrutiny in New Orleans on Tuesday, the next step in a long-winding case that may be headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.”

I will link to the audio of this oral argument, which has just concluded, before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit once it becomes available online.

“Skeptical Supreme Court justices hear gay marriage case”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.

“What’s at Stake in the Supreme Court’s Gay-Marriage Case”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times and Emily Bazelon of The New York Times Magazine had this pre-argument discussion.

“Supreme Court justices voice doubts about changing traditional marriage”: David G. Savage and Timothy M. Phelps of The Los Angeles Times have this news update.

“Supreme Court hears historic same-sex marriage arguments”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has an updated report that begins, “Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is asking skeptical questions as the court hears arguments over the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry.”

“In New Gay Marriage Case, An Old Dissent Could Loom Large”: Jess Bravin has this post today at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog.”

“Gay marriage friends, foes spar outside U.S. Supreme Court”: Reuters has this report.

And at this blog’s Twitter feed, I am linking to much of the instant coverage of this morning’s U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments.

“How Legal Blogging Has Changed Over the Decade”: Robert Ambrogi had this post last Friday at his “Law Sites” blog.

“Women shut out of Idaho judge selection; Idaho senators have interviewed only men”: Today’s edition of The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Washington contains a front page article that begins, “It seems that women need not apply to the federal district court bench in Idaho.” According to the article, “Idaho is the only state in the federal 9th Circuit that has never had a woman judge on the U.S. District Court bench.”

“Obamacare shock looms: Court ruling could devastate small biz.” Kimberly Atkins of The Boston Herald has this report.

“Tsarnaev’s defense team cites sway of mother, brother; Radical religion said to permeate family setting”: Patricia Wen and Milton J. Valencia have this article in today’s edition of The Boston Globe.

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Katharine Q. Seelye has an article headlined “Tsarnaev’s Lawyers Focus on Chaotic Upbringing in Case Against Death Penalty.”

Eric Levenson of Boston.com has an article headlined “Defense: Supermax Prison Is Miserable, So Send Dzhokhar Tsarnaev There.”

Laurel J. Sweet of The Boston Herald has an article headlined “Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s mother-in-law: Islam became an ‘obsession.’” And columnist Peter Gelzinis has an essay titled “Only way to erase Dzhokhar is to let him live: Supermax means silence.”

Reuters reports that “Boston bomber’s lawyers to probe Tsarnaev’s troubled history.”

The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “Tsarnaev defense: spare him the death penalty, put him in supermax prison.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Tovia Smith had an audio segment titled “Defense Team Urges Jury To Send Boston Bomber To Prison For Life.”

And online at Slate, Seth Stevenson has a post titled “A Smorgasbord of Excuses: The defense tries a little of everything to save Dzhokhar Tsarnaev from the death penalty.”

“Legal Battle Over Gay Marriage Hits The Supreme Court Tuesday”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Washington Bureau reports that “Supreme Court hears arguments on same-sex marriage this week.”

Today at “Above the Law,” David Lat has a post titled “A Midnight Visit To The Folks Camped Out At SCOTUS.”

And starting at 10:45 a.m. eastern time, “SCOTUSblog” will live blog updates from the oral argument via this link.

According to a news release that the Public Information Office of the U.S. Supreme Court issued last month, “The Court will post the audio recording and unofficial transcript as soon as the digital files are available for uploading to the Website. The audio recording and transcript should be available no later than 2 p.m. on April 28.”

“A Free Kick In: How does the Constitution protect innocent people who are stuck in jail?” Mark Joseph Stern has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Appeals court upholds Highland Park assault weapons ban”: The Chicago Tribune has a news update that begins, “A federal court Monday upheld Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons — possibly setting the stage for a showdown over the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 2-1 decision, the federal appellate court in Chicago upheld the city’s ban on assault weapons, including AK-47s and AR-15s and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.”

And The Associated Press reports that “US court upholds Chicago suburb’s assault weapons ban.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link. Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook wrote the majority opinion, while Senior Circuit Judge Daniel A. Manion issued a dissenting opinion.

“The Slants Get Hearing on Rude Trademark Issue Facing Redskins”: Susan Decker of Bloomberg News has this report.

My earlier coverage of today’s Federal Circuit order granting en banc review can be accessed here.

“Supreme Court Set to Grapple with Gay-Marriage Question; Justices will hear arguments Tuesday in one of the most direct constitutional issues to cross their docket in recent memory”: Jess Bravin will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal. You can freely access the full text of the article via Google.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Stanford student goes to Supreme Court to fight for her moms.”

In Tuesday’s edition of The Boston Globe, Michael Levenson will have an article headlined “Mary Bonauto set to argue gay marriage case before Supreme Court.”

Cheryl Wetzstein of The Washington Times has an article headlined “Supreme Court gay marriage cases: What to expect.”

Sandhya Somashekhar of The Washington Post has an article headlined “High stakes as Supreme Court considers same-sex marriage case.” In addition, the newspaper has an editorial titled “The Supreme Court must finish the job on same-sex equality.”

The Sandusky Register reports that “Supreme Court to rule on Sandusky native’s gay marriage; Ruling may make Sandusky High School product Jim Obergefell famous.”

Paul Singer of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court gay marriage case reunites hometown opponents.”

The Lawrence Journal-World reports that “Kansans watch closely as Supreme Court hears gay marriage cases.”

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that “U.S. Supreme Court to weigh Ky.’s same-sex marriage ban; arguments focus on states’ rights, equal protection.”

Amanda Terkel of The Huffington Post reports that “Marriage Equality Supporters Camp Out At Supreme Court Days Before Oral Arguments.”

This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment titled “3 Reasons Republicans Might Cheer A Pro-Gay-Marriage Ruling.”

At CNN.com, Jeffrey Toobin has an essay titled “Supreme Court faces new reality on marriage equality.”

Online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Don’t Panic! Gay Marriage Will Win.”

And online at The Daily Beast, Jay Michaelson has a post titled “Gay Marriage Could Lose Tomorrow.”

“Nashville Diocese gets Supreme Court win over contraception”: The Tennessean has this report.

And Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court tells another court to reconsider Obamacare mandate for religious groups.”

“PA high court reinstates Msgr. Lynn’s child-endangerment conviction”: Joseph A. Slobodzian of The Philadelphia Inquirer has a news update that begins, “Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court on Monday reinstated the child-endangerment conviction of Msgr. William J. Lynn, the first Catholic Church official found guilty for his role supervising priests in the clergy sex-abuse scandal.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Pennsylvania top court reinstates monsignor’s conviction.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of a majority opinion and a dissenting opinion.

“SCOTUS to decide if ‘unharmed’ plaintiffs have right to sue”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

“Stage set for landmark U.S. Supreme Court gay marriage arguments”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.

“Dear John Letters: A taxonomy of gay marriage arguments aimed at Chief Justice John Roberts.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online today at Slate.

In other jurisprudence essays recently posted online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have an essay titled “Not All Must Rise: Many of the people who will witness Supreme Court history paid a ton for the privilege.”

And Mark Joseph Stern has an essay titled “The Marriage Mastermind: How Evan Wolfson transformed American society.”

“Taming the Butterflies Before a Supreme Court Argument; Lawyers in the same-sex marriage cases and veteran advocates reveal their routines”: Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal has this report today.

You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

“Philly judge sticks to $1 million sanction of lawyer”: Chris Mondics of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this news update.

“Supreme Court Rejects Teva’s Reglan Preemption Dispute”: Emily Field of Law360.com has a report (subscription required for full access) that begins, “The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.’s request to review a Pennsylvania appellate ruling that federal law did not preempt the product liability claims of thousands of generic Reglan users.”

“Why Massachusetts Led the Way on Same-Sex Marriage”: Jesse Wegman has this “Editorial Observer” essay in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Fourth Circuit Rules That Plaintiff in Appeal from Ex Parte TTAB Decision Must Pay ALL Expenses”: John L. Welch has this post today at “The TTABlog” reporting on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued last Thursday.

“In ‘Slants’ Case, Appeals Court Will Reconsider Opinion on ‘Disparaging’ Trademarks; The Federal Circuit chooses to wipe out an opinion issued last week regarding an Asian-American band”: Eriq Gardner had this post today at the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a post titled “Federal Circuit will rehear ‘disparaging marks’ trademark case about The Slants — and the Redskins case may be affected.”

You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granting rehearing en banc at this link.

The order granting en banc review orders the parties to file new briefs addressing the following issue:

Does the bar on registration of disparaging marks in 15 U.S.C. sec. 1052(a) violate the First Amendment?

The order also provides that amici may file briefs on rehearing en banc without having to obtain further leave of court.

My earlier coverage of the three-judge panel’s ruling in this case, which issued one week ago today, can be accessed here and here.

“Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) discusses cameras in the Supreme Court”: C-SPAN has posted online this video clip today.

“How gay-marriage case was born of a divided Ohio”: Amber Hunt and Keith BieryGolick of The Cincinnati Enquirer have this report. In addition, Hunt and Kevin Grasha have an article headlined “Need to knows about the Cincinnati same-sex marriage case.”

Jessica Wehrman and Jack Torry of The Columbus Dispatch report that “Gay-marriage battle goes before Supreme Court on Tuesday.”

Todd Spangler of The Detroit Free Press has an article headlined “Meet the lawyers who will face off in same-sex marriage case.”

And Chad Livengood of The Detroit News reports that “Gay marriage case a race with time for Michigan couple.”

“U.S. justices to weigh suit against people-search service Spokeo”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report, along with an article headlined “U.S. top court throws out Obamacare contraception ruling.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Business Bid to Curb Consumer Suits Gets Top U.S. Court Look.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Congress’s power to permit lawsuits at issue.”

“Gay-Rights Skeptic John Roberts Urged to Make Supreme Court History; The court hears arguments on Tuesday in a historic clash that may legalize gay marriage nationwide”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“Court weighs excessive force against inmates awaiting trial”: The Associated Press has this report.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Kingsley v. Hendrickson, No. 14-6368. Paul D. Clement argued the appeal for respondents.

“Lawyers Seek Sea Change on Gay Rights at Supreme Court”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Q&A: Issues, possible legal outcomes in gay marriage cases.” Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

And on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Cokie Roberts had an audio segment titled “Same-Sex Supreme Court Case Raises Political Issues.”