“The Birth Control Hijack: The Supreme Court’s conservatives think the Affordable Care Act is hijacking insurance plans to provide contraception.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Bush Would Have Nominated Garland”: Law professor Richard W. Painter has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Court considers when police need warrants to track suspects through cellphones”: Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post has an article that begins, “A federal appeals court on Wednesday considered how easily investigators should be able to track criminal suspects through their cellphones, becoming the latest front in the debate over how to balance public-safety interests with digital privacy.”

You can access via this link (127 MB mp3 audio file) the audio of today’s en banc oral argument of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

“My Supreme Court Cotillion”: Josh Blackman has this blog post today.

“Republican Pennsylvania Senator to Meet With Merrick Garland”: Emmarie Huetteman of The New York Times has this report.

Jonathan Tamari of The Philadelphia Inquirer has a blog post titled “Toomey will meet with SCOTUS nominee.”

Teresa Bonner of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania reports that “Toomey agrees to meet Supreme Court nominee, but not to act on nomination.”

Michael Pound of The Post-Gazette has a blog post titled “Toomey will meet with Garland but won’t change stance.”

Laura Olson of The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania reports that “Pat Toomey says he’ll meet with Supreme Court nominee.”

And Seung Min Kim of Politico.com reports that “Embattled Toomey agrees to sit with Merrick Garland.”

“Judicial court freezes proceedings against former Justice Eakin”: Mark Fazlollah and Angela Couloumbis have this article in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Wallace McKelvey of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania reports that “Disciplinary court puts case against Pa. Supreme Court Justice Eakin on hold.”

And in related commentary, in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Rebecca Love Kourlis has an op-ed titled “Eakin resignation creates chance to test merit selection.”

“Sotomayor Helps Puerto Rico Argue Its Bankruptcy Case”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“Argument analysis: On new health care case, a single word may tell it all.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

And Mark Walsh has a post titled “A ‘view’ from the Courtroom: Sister Act.”

“The Stakes in Hulk Hogan’s Gawker Lawsuit”: Fabio Bertoni has this post online today at The New Yorker.

“Businesses Win Lawsuit Curbs With New Rules; Change could help companies in their battle against consumer litigation”: Joe Palazzolo and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal have this report.

“Class-Action Suits Have a Shot in Post-Scalia Era”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“The Supreme Court Flirts With Chaos At Today’s Birth Control Argument”: Ian Millhiser has this post at ThinkProgress.

“Blocked Voting: Was Virginia’s clearly racist gerrymandering unconstitutional?” Mark Joseph Stern has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“If You Give a Judge a Meeting: A children’s tale by Sen. Chuck Grassley.” Dahlia Lithwick has this post online at Slate.

“Justices Seem Split in Case on Birth Control Mandate”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

In today’s mail: I received “The Curve: A Novel,” by Jeremy Blachman and Cameron Stracher. The book, published by Ankerwycke, is scheduled to go on sale June 7, 2016.

Zubik v. Burwell oral argument transcript now available online: You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Zubik v. Burwell, No. 14-1418.

“Court: Racial animus ‘code words’ used in NY housing case.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court says officials in a suburban New York village acquiesced to race-based opposition to a housing project.”

You can access today’s 102-page ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

“Justices divided over health law birth control plan”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court divided over Obamacare contraceptives challenge.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Obama Contraceptive Rule Gets Mixed Reception at Supreme Court.”

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Court appears divided on contraceptive coverage, with Kennedy raising concern.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court deeply divided over religious freedom, reproductive rights.”

Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times reports that “Birth control carve-out in Obamacare splits the Supreme Court; Liberals are skeptical of implications, raising prospect of tie.”

Jennifer Haberkorn and Josh Gerstein of Politico.com report that “Supreme Court hears Obamacare birth control rule challenge.”

Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Weighs Whether Obamacare’s Contraception Exemption ‘Hijacks’ Religion; The sequel to the 2014 Hobby Lobby case could be the last stand for the conflict between reproductive health and religious rights.”

And Peter Sullivan of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court split on ObamaCare contraceptive rule.”

“All agree his sentence was too harsh, but he may still stay locked up forever”: Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post has this report.

“Supreme Court Case on Contraceptives Mandate May Offer Little Closure”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Issue of contraceptive coverage returns to Supreme Court.” And Julie Zauzmer has an article headlined “Inside the Catholic nursing home at the center of a contentious Supreme Court case.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Little Sisters waging big fight at Supreme Court.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Obama health law birth control plan returns to Supreme Court.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN.com reports that “Supreme Court hears challenge to Obamacare contraceptive mandate.”

Irin Carmon of msnbc.com reports that “Birth control is back at the Supreme Court.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Birth Control At The Supreme Court: Does Free Coverage Violate Religious Freedom?”

At the “Democracy in America” blog of The Economist, Steven Mazie has a post titled “Birth control and justice: Little Sisters of the Poor take aim at Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate.”

Ian Millhiser of ThinkProgress has a post titled “The Supreme Court Case That Could Put Out The Hobby Lobby Fire.”

At the “Bill of Health” blog, Greg Lipper has a post titled “Zubik v. Burwell, Part 6: The Accommodation is the Least-Restrictive Option.” This post contains links to the earlier five parts of Lipper’s discussion of the case.

The Los Angeles Times has an editorial titled “Birth control and Obamacare are on trial yet again in the Supreme Court.”

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Elizabeth Deutsch — a student at Yale Law School — has an op-ed titled “No Contraception? No Equality.”

And online at USA Today, Mother Loraine Maguire — the Mother Provincial for the Little Sisters of the Poor — has an essay titled “Obamacare attacks religious liberty: Little Sisters Mother Provincial.”

“Supreme Court Upholds Worker Class-Action Suit Against Tyson”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court deals blow to corporate push against class-action suits.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court upholds workers’ class-action verdict in setback for corporations.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Upholds Employee Class Action Against Tyson Foods; Decision dashes business hopes that court would limit use of statistical evidence in class actions.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court makes some class action lawsuits easier.”

Claire Williams of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports that “Tyson loses appeal of $5.8M verdict.”

Cristian Farias and Dave Jamieson of The Huffington Post report that “Supreme Court Hands A Major Victory To Workers Who Were Stiffed On Overtime Pay; The case is one of many the court heard while Justice Antonin Scalia was still on the bench.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion analysis: Group lawsuits get a (modest?) boost.”