“Who Cares About the Supreme Court’s ‘Legitimacy’? Conservatives seem to assume that only the chief justice is moved by fears that he and his colleagues will end up looking like politicians in robes.” Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“The Ruling Against a Cop Accused of a Horrific Body Cavity Search Is a Rare Victory for Police Accountability”: Online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay discussing a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Comparing Cert Stage OSG Efforts Under Obama and Trump”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“Politically Ruined Orie Sisters Take Fight to Third Circuit”: Emilee Larkin of Courthouse News Service has a report that begins, “Three politically active sisters, one a former Pennsylvania senator and another a former state Supreme Court justice, challenged their corruption convictions Wednesday at the Third Circuit.”

When the oral argument audio becomes available online from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, I will link to it.

Update: The Third Circuit heard three separate oral arguments in these cases, and you can access the oral argument audio recordings here, here, and here.

“Does the Constitution Require the Insanity Defense?” Law professor Sherry F. Colb has this essay online at Justia’s Verdict.

And at “Dorf on Law,” Colb has a related blog post titled “Humanely Raised Animals and the Insanity Defense.”

“Democrats defend asking nominees about Catholic faith, affiliations”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

Patrick L. Gregory of Bloomberg Law reports that “Senators Spar on Religion Questions at Trump Judge Pick Hearing.”

And Tim Ryan of Courthouse News Service reports that “Senate Panel Advances Nominee for Third Circuit Bench.”

You can view via this link the video of today’s U.S. Senate Judicary Committee confirmation hearing for Third Circuit nominee U.S. District Judge Peter J. Phipps (W.D. Pa.).

“Judges Give Both Sides a Grilling in Youth Climate Case Against the Government”: John Schwartz has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

Brady Dennis of The Washington Post reports that “Government argues for halt to youth climate lawsuit, saying there is no constitutional right to a stable climate; 21 young people sued in 2015, hoping to force an end to fossil-fuel-friendly U.S. policies.”

Julia Rosen of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Lawyers are optimistic that the youths’ climate change lawsuit will go to trial.”

In today’s edition of The Oregonian, Maxine Bernstein has a front page article headlined “Federal appeals court hears ‘climate change kids’ case.”

Andrew Selsky of The Associated Press reports that “US court weighs if climate change violates children’s rights.”

Barbara Grzincic of Reuters reports that “9th Circuit hears government’s bid to boot ‘kids’ climate change’ suit.”

Abby Smith of Bloomberg Environment reports that “Kids’ Climate Claims ‘Compelling’ But Court Queries Own Role.”

John D. Sutter of CNN reports that “Feds are still trying to stop the ‘climate kids’ lawsuit.”

And Jennifer Hijazi of Climatewire reports that “Kids face off with feds in landmark climate case.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has posted on YouTube at this link the video of yesterday’s oral argument.

“How Fetal Personhood Emerged as the Next Stage of the Abortion Wars”: Law professor Jeannie Suk Gersen has this post online at The New Yorker.

“A Professor’s Murder in Tallahassee Was a Contract Hit, Prosecutors Say”: Steve Miller of Miami New Times has this report.

“Appeals court to revisit grand jury secrecy”: Josh Gerstein of Politico has this blog post about an order granting rehearing en banc that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

“Stevens’ Jurisprudence of Facts Is No Substitute for One of Principle”: John O. McGinnis has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Gundy v. United States Could Signal a Major Change in the Supreme Court’s Separation of Powers Jurisprudence”: Peter J. Wallison has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Abortion Bans Are Wildly Unpopular. How Do Republicans Keep Passing Them?” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Justice Thomas on Abortion and Eugenics: As the court dodges the issue, he takes an honest look at the racial history — as he’s done in many cases.” Columnist Jason L. Riley will have this essay in Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Florida Supreme Court poised to let ‘harmless error’ kill 173 death row prisoners”: The South Florida Sun Sentinel has published this editorial.

“How Republicans are leaving Democrats in the dust on judicial confirmations”: Deanna Paul of The Washington Post has this report.

“Supreme Court in waiting game on Trump administration bid to end DACA protection for immigrants”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Man Who Threatened to Kill 2 Senators Who Supported Kavanaugh Gets 18 Months in Prison”: Jacey Fortin of The New York Times has this report.

Christopher Burns of The Bangor Daily News reports that “Man who threatened Susan Collins over support for Kavanaugh sentenced to 18 months in prison.”

And Jim Mustian of The Associated Press reports that “Man sentenced for threats to senators over Kavanaugh vote.”

“The Democrats Discover the Supreme Court: Pete Buttigieg’s endorsement of a court-packing plan exemplifies the high court’s journey from afterthought to central concern among progressives.” David A. Graham of The Atlantic has this report.

“Judge Peter Phipps — Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit”: Harsh Voruganti has this post at his blog, “The Vetting Room.”

“Tension in the Court: Public collegiality belies behind-the-scenes debates.” Mark Walsh has this article in the June 2019 issue of ABA Journal magazine.

“Trump administration asks court for emergency approval to proceed with border wall”: Josh Gerstein has of Politico this report on a filing submitted last night to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“A Better Way to Fix the Supreme Court: Pete Buttigieg’s plan is constitutionally dubious and would enshrine the very problem it seeks to eradicate; Here’s a different solution.” Matt Ford of The New Republic has this news analysis.

“Supreme Court Sides With Worker in Discrimination Suit; Justices also agree to hear case involving video footage of Blackbeard’s sunken ship”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Justice Clarence Thomas Speaks at Supreme Court Historical Society Annual Lecture”: C-SPAN has posted this video online.

“Appeals court rules against woman charged in Dan Markel murder”: Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of Florida’s First District Court of Appeal issued on Friday.

“The Destruction of 6 Dallas Love Field Gates Could Be Headed to the Supreme Court”: Gary Leff has this post at his “View from the Wing” blog.

At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Ilya Somin has a blog post titled “The Supreme Court Should Take the Love Terminal Takings Case; A lower court decision the Supreme Court is currently considering reviewing has important — and dangerous — implications for property rights.”

And earlier at the Hover Institution’s “Defining Ideas” blog, Richard A. Epstein had a post titled “Plunder At Love Field.”

“Dicta and the Original Meaning of Article III”: Michael C. Dorf has this interesting post at his “Dorf on Law” blog.

“At the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas Scoffs at Retirement Rumors”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Clarence Thomas questions sources of retirement rumors.”

Zack Budryk of The Hill reports that “Clarence Thomas has ‘no idea’ where retirement rumors come from.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Mark Walsh has a post titled “Justice Thomas says he has ‘no stress’ and is ‘doing fine.’“

“Where We Stand at the Beginning of June”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“America’s Abortion Debate Is Serious Not Literal”: Greg Weiner has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Clarence Thomas says he has ‘no idea’ where retirement rumors started”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

“Census Target: John Roberts; Liberals spin a memo to influence the Chief Justice in a crucial case.” This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

And online at The New York Times, columnist David Leonhardt has an essay titled “A Partisan Grab, in Six Steps: Will the Supreme Court act as a Republican branch?“

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

1. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the Court in Azar v. Allina Health Services, No. 17-1484. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh did not participate. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Taggart v. Lorenzen, No. 18-489. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Fort Bend County v. Davis, No. 18-525. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. And Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Mont v. United States, No. 17-8995. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Gorsuch joined. 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 three new cases and called for the views of the Solicitor General in an original case.