“International child custody battle between Ohio and Italy will get Supreme Court hearing”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

And Sabrina Eaton of The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that “U.S. Supreme Court to hear international child custody dispute from Cleveland area.”

“Justice Breyer Raises Specter of Perpetual Detention Without Trial at Guantánamo; The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of a man who has been held in wartime detention for 17 years with no end in sight”: Charlie Savage and Carol Rosenberg of The New York Times have this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court turns away appeal from longtime detainee at Guantanamo Bay.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court refuses to hear prisoner’s challenge to Guantánamo detention 17 years into Afghanistan conflict.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Yemeni Guantanamo detainee’s bid for release rejected by Supreme Court.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Guantanamo Inmate Rejected by Supreme Court on 17-Year Detention.”

Pete Williams of NBC News has a report headlined “Justice Breyer: Supreme Court should decide if ‘perpetual detention’ permitted at Gitmo; The case involved Moath Hamza Ahmed al-Alwi, a man from Yemen captured by Pakistani forces and accused of being one of Osama bin Laden’s bodyguards.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court rejects Guantanamo Bay detention challenge.”

Jacqueline Thomsen of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court declines to take up Guantanamo Bay detainee’s case.”

At the “Lawfare” blog, Robert Chesney has a post titled “Justice Breyer’s Question in al-Alwi: Is Detention Still Justified?”

And in commentary, online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “Stephen Breyer Is Worried About the Forever War’s Permanent Prisoners. He’s 15 Years Too Late.”

“Justices reject challenge to ‘In God We Trust’ on U.S. money”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

And Caleb Parke of Fox News reports that “Supreme Court rejects atheists’ attempt to scrub ‘In God We Trust’ off US currency.”

“SCOTUS petition: Due process requires fee awards to lawyers outside class action leadership.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“Why June could be a blockbuster month for Supreme Court decisions”: Marcia Coyle of PBS NewsHour has this report.

“Daughter of Fierce Kavanaugh Defender Amy Chua to Clerk for . . . Brett Kavanaugh”: Jeremy Stahl has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Access the contents of the June 2019 issue of the Harvard Law Review: Via this link.

“On Supreme Court Reform, No Consensus”: Kenneth Jost has this post at his blog, “Jost on Justice.”

“A ‘view’ from the courtroom: Return to sender.” Mark Walsh has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Supreme Court makes more headway on its next term than on the major decisions that remain in this one”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

“Clarence Thomas Said What? Adam Cohen on how the Supreme Court justice picked up his thesis on eugenics and ran with it in the opposite direction.” On Saturday, Slate posted online this new installment of its “Amicus” podcast featuring Dahlia Lithwick.

“Ricky Langley loses appeal; 5th Circuit Court affirms second-degree murder conviction”: Lisa Addison of the American Press of Lake Charles, Louisiana has this report on an en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued last Thursday.

“Appeals Court Sides With Search Engines In Battle Over ‘Scam’ Listings”: Wendy Davis of DigitalNewsDaily has this report.

John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable reports that “Court Upholds Edge Protection from Third Party Liability; Said that extends even to content they know is false.”

Megan Mineiro of Courthouse News Service reports that “Deceptive Map Results Won’t Leave Google Liable.”

And at his “Technology & Marketing Law Blog, Eric Goldman has a post titled “D.C. Circuit Issues Sweeping Pro-Section 230 Opinion — Marshall’s Locksmith v. Google.”

Chief Judge Merrick B. Garland wrote last Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued rulings in three argued cases.

1. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Quarles v. United States, No. 17-778. And Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court in Return Mail, Inc. v. Postal Service, No. 17-1594. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. And Justice Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton, No. 18-389. You can access the oral argument via this link.

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court granted review in five new cases.

And in al-Alwi v. Trump, No. 18-740, Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a statement respecting the denial of certiorari.

“The Supreme Court’s Next Three Weeks Could Shake Up the 2020 Election”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“Abortions are legal in Guam, but doctors won’t perform them”: Caleb Jones of The Associated Press has this report, along with a related report headlined “Lack of abortion access troubles Guam’s 1st female governor.”

“Court-packing isn’t the way to depoliticize the Supreme Court”: This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

“Conservative gains at Supreme Court leading to anger, frustration and ‘peeks behind the curtain'”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Men’s basketball players’ dismissal by University of Oregon upheld in appeals court”: Shawn Medow of the Daily Emerald, a student media organization of the University of Oregon, has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued Tuesday.

“Being black, having a gun and fleeing is not reason enough for police to stop someone, appellate court rules in Seattle case”: In today’s edition of The Seattle Times, Mike Carter has this front page article about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on Wednesday.

“Antiabortion activists lose appeal over video posts, ordered to pay $195,000”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.

And Nicholas Iovino of Courthouse News Service reports that “Ninth Circuit Lets Contempt Sanctions of Abortion Foe Stand.”

You can access Wednesday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Appeals court rules that yelling expletive at police is constitutionally protected speech”: Fred Barbash of The Washington Post has this report.

And Max Brantley of Arkansas Times reports that “8th Circuit allows suit by man arrested for cursing trooper.”

You can access Monday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at this link.

“Man with 28-year-old Felony False Statement Conviction Can’t Be Denied Second Amendment Rights; So a federal district court in Illinois held yesterday”: Eugene Volokh had this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” back in April 2018. On Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed that decision by means of a majority opinion written by Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook.

“Justice Ginsburg says deep divisions on the way, and Supreme Court watchers look for clues”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Ruth Bader Ginsburg wary of sharp divide among Supreme Court as crucial cases loom; Liberal jurist has kind words for colleague Kavanaugh over his selection of female clerks.”

Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “Justice Ginsburg warns of more 5-4 decisions ahead.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Ginsburg Hints at Sharp Divides as Supreme Court Term Nears End.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Justice Ginsburg hints at her ruling on upcoming census citizenship question; She spoke candidly at a meeting of judges and lawyers in the 2nd Circuit court.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Justice Ginsburg warns the court may be sharply divided over final cases.”

And Brie Stimson of Fox News reports that “Ginsburg suggests many ‘most-watched’ Supreme Court cases could be decided by 1 vote.”

You can access the prepared text of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s remarks yesterday at the Judicial Conference of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link (via Adam Liptak).

“With political power at stake, Supreme Court is set to rule on gerrymandering and the census”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“9th Circ. Judge Rips Trump’s ‘Broad’ Birth Control Exemption”: Law360 has this report (subscription required for full access) on an oral argument (YouTube video link) that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard yesterday in San Francisco.

And earlier this week, online at The Wall Street Journal, James Freeman had an installment of that publication’s “Best of the Web” feature titled “Democrats vs. Nuns: The Little Sisters of the Poor are again forced to defend their liberty in federal court.”

“Appeals court reinstates $200 million settlement with Hyundai, Kia owners”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report.

You can access today’s ruling of an 11-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Why Pete Buttigieg Is Wrong About the Supreme Court Technocratic reforms won’t clear the way for a progressive agenda.” Columnist Jamelle Bouie has this essay online at The New York Times.

“The Supreme Court may have already decided the census case. Will the new revelations matter?” Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.

“Deceased Strategist’s Files Detail Republican Gerrymandering in North Carolina, Advocates Say”: Michael Wines will have this article in Friday’s edition of The New York Times.

Sam Levine of HuffPost reports that “GOP Lied About Using Racial Data To Gerrymander, Lawyers Say; The stunning accusations came after the daughter of a former Republican strategist gave the lawyers hard drives containing the computer files.”

And online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “Newly Discovered Files Suggest GOP Lawmakers Lied in Court About Racial Gerrymandering to Stop An Election.”

“Washington Supreme Court rules once more against Richland florist who refused flowers for gay wedding”: David Gutman of The Seattle Times has this report.

Joel Connelly of SeattlePI reports that “Supreme Court stands by discrimination verdict on Washington florist.”

Jim Camden of The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Washington reports that “Court again rules against florist who refused gay couple.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Christian florist appeals to Supreme Court over same-sex wedding case.”

Nicholas Geranios of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: No religious rancor in flowers for gay wedding case.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “Washington state high court again rules against Christian florist who refused gay wedding.”

Devan Cole and Ariane de Vogue of CNN report that “Washington state Supreme Court rules against florist in same-sex wedding case.”

Ronn Blitzer and Bill Mears of Fox News reports that “Washington Supreme Court rules against florist who refused service for gay couple’s wedding.”

Jacqueline Thomsen of The Hill reports that “Washington Supreme Court upholds ruling against florist who refused same-sex couple.”

And Hayley Miller of HuffPost reports that “Court Upholds Ruling Against Washington Florist Who Refused To Serve Gay Couple; State judges did not act with religious animus when weighing the Arlene’s Flowers case, the Washington Supreme Court held.”

You can access today’s unanimous ruling of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington at this link.

“Who Can Adopt a Native American Child? A Texas Couple vs. 573 Tribes; A bitter custody battle threatens affirmative action laws, tribal rights, and the future of one little girl.” Jan Hoffman has this front page article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Use It or Lose It: The Supreme Court Gets a Procedural Point About Title VII Unanimously Right.” Law professor Joanna L. Grossman has this essay online at Justia’s Verdict.

“Supreme Court Notebook: Thomas, RBG align in 5-4 rulings.” Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.