“Constitutional Anomalies or As-Applied Challenges? A Defense of Religious Exemptions.” Stephanie H. Barclay and law professor Mark Rienzi have posted this article on SSRN (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

“How Should a Committed Originalist Decide Masterpiece Cakeshop?” Eric Segall has this blog post at “Dorf on Law.”

“Senator Flake isn’t a Liberal, and Neither is Chief Justice Roberts”: Richard Primus has this post at the “Balkinization” blog.

“The Justice Department Goes To The Supreme Court To Keep DACA Documents Secret”: Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News has this report.

And Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has a blog post titled “Trump administration takes DACA documents fight to Supreme Court.”

“Capital One must face overdraft fee lawsuit: U.S. appeals court.” Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report on a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

“Christie Case Could Topple Sanctuary Cities, Marijuana Laws”: Kimberly S. Robinson of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

“A Note on Carter’s ‘Court-Packing'”: Asher Steinberg has this post at his blog, “The Narrowest Grounds.”

“Appeals court rules against releasing draft Whitewater indictments against Clinton”: Lydia Wheeler of The Hill has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.

“In Carpenter Case, Justice Sotomayor Tries to Picture the Smartphone Future”: Amy Davidson Sorkin has this post online at The New Yorker.

“How the Lawyer David Boies Turned a Young Novelist’s Sexual Past Against Her”: Sheelah Kolhatkar has this post online at The New Yorker.

“Opponents in LGBT case agree: It’s not about wedding cake.” David Crary of The Associated Press has this report.

And in today’s edition of The Washington Post, Roxanne Roberts has an article headlined “Wedding cakes can be stunning creations. But do they qualify as art?”

“Supreme Court: Interveners speak for and against Trinity Western University law school; Humanists, atheists, lawyers, Evangelicals, Sikhs, Seventh Day Adventists, Catholic bishops, secularists, teachers, charities . . . .” Ian Mulgrew of The Vancouver Sun has this report.

Because the case was argued in the Supreme Court of Canada, you can view the oral argument video online. Yesterday’s oral argument video can be accessed here. When the archive of today’s oral argument video becomes available online, I will link to it.

Access the audio of this week’s U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments: Via this link.

“Is there a constitutional right for a business to not serve customers?” Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky has this essay online at ABA Journal.

And offering a contrasting view of the case, online at National Review, David French has an essay titled “Stop Misrepresenting Masterpiece Cakeshop: The First Amendment and nondiscrimination laws should point the Supreme Court to the just decision.”

“Neil Gorsuch’s Independent Streak: At arguments in Carpenter v. United States, the conservative justice used originalist principles to defend 21st-century digital privacy.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

And online at The Atlantic, Jeffrey Rosen has an essay titled “A Liberal-Conservative Alliance on the Supreme Court Against Digital Surveillance: Justices found common ground in asserting the relevance of the Fourth Amendment in the electronic age, even as they cited sharply different rationales.”

“Action on Grasz judicial nomination delayed”: Don Walton of The Lincoln Journal Star has this report.

“Judge Kozinski Objects”: Clinical assistant professor of law Beth H. Wilensky has posted this paper online.

“Supreme Court’s cake case pits gay rights versus Christian faith”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.