Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court granted five petitions for writ of certiorari today, which collectively will result in three hours of oral argument.

“Ex-Garden City funeral home worker’s case going to US Supreme Court”: Todd Spangler of The Detroit Free Press has this report.

“Supreme Court term to begin with blockbuster question: Is it legal to fire someone for being gay or transgender?” Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

And in commentary, online at USA Today, William A. Moore has an essay titled “My partner was fired for being gay. The Supreme Court can’t set a pro-bigotry precedent.”

“Dan Markel case: Day Five of murder trial focuses in on actions of Charlie Adelson, cell phone trail.” Karl Etters of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“Asian Americans are rightly angry about racism. Making colleges less diverse isn’t the answer.” Jeannie Park has this essay online at The Washington Post.

And online at The Boston Globe, Richard D. Kahlenberg has an essay titled “There’s a better way to diversify Harvard.”

“Harvard’s Legal Discrimination: A federal court upholds the university’s race-conscious admissions.” The Wall Street Journal has published this editorial.

“Building a More Inclusive Federal Judiciary”: Danielle Root, Jake Faleschini, and Grace Oyenub of the Center for American Progress have this report.

And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “The absurd whiteness of America’s court system, in 2 charts; America was making real progress on judicial diversity; Then Trump happened.”

“U.S. Supreme Court to tackle gay rights, guns, abortion and Trump”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.

“Planned Parenthood quietly built new abortion facility in Fairview Heights”: Michele Munz and Kim Bell of The St. Louis Post-Dispatch have this report.

Kayla Epstein of The Washington Post reports that “As Missouri restricts abortion, Planned Parenthood opens massive new clinic across the border.”

And Gabriella Borter of Reuters reports that “Planned Parenthood to open large Illinois clinic as Missouri readies abortion ban.”

“Harvard Won a Key Affirmative Action Battle. But the War’s Not Over. More than 40 years after the Supreme Court first weighed in on race-conscious admissions, the fight remains as fractious as ever.” Anemona Hartocollis of The New York Times has this report.

Deirdre Fernandes of The Boston Globe has an article headlined “After Harvard ruling, what next for Asian-American applicants?”

Camille G. Caldera, Delano R. Franklin, and Samuel W. Zwickel of The Harvard Crimson have articles headlined “Tuesday’s Admissions Decision is Only the First Step in a Long Appeals Process, Experts Say” and “Harvard Ruling May Offer ‘Roadmap’ for Other Affirmative Action Cases.”

In commentary, online at The New York Times, law professor Melissa Murray has an essay titled “That Affirmative Action Ruling Was Good. Its Rationale, Terrible. In this legalistic world, sometimes how you win is as important as winning itself.”

And online at The Boston Globe, columnist Shirley Leung has an essay titled “Harvard ruling is a defiant defense of affirmative action in higher education.”

“As Strine prepares to leave bench, a call for institutional investors to push for change”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“A Lawyer’s Guide to Upcoming Supreme Court Term”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Dan Markel case: Defense attorneys zero in on inconsistent Luis Rivera statements.” Karl Etters of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“All of the 6-week abortion bans passed this year have now been blocked in court; But the biggest threat to abortion might come from another place”: Anna North of Vox has this report.

“Big Environmental Term for Supreme Court? Too Soon to Tell.” Ellen M. Gilmer of Bloomberg Environment has this report.

“The David Rubenstein Show: Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Part 1).” Bloomberg TV has posted this video online. You can also access the video on YouTube via this link.

“Neil Gorsuch no ‘swing vote’ despite liberal crossovers, court watchers say”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

“How Should Article VII’s Ultimatum Game Affect Constitutional Interpretation?” Rick Hills has this post at “PrawfsBlawg.”

“June Medical And The End of Reproductive Justice”: Leah Litman has this post at the “Take Care” blog.

“Adam Schiff, who steered clear of Harvard Law drama, now at the center of impeachment inquiry”: Michael Levenson has this front page article in today’s edition of The Boston Globe.

“Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyers see progress in the #MeToo movement”: Stephanie Ebbert of The Boston Globe has this report.

“Everything Was Late, but Nothing Was Jurisdictional; In Vergara v. City of Chicago, the Seventh Circuit tackled a delayed district court opinion, an untimely notice of appeal, and a late objection to that notice”: At his “Final Decisions” blog, Bryan Lammon has this post about an interesting decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued Monday.

“Harvard Still Needs Diversity in Admissions; Affirmative action is an important way to treat the symptoms of racial bias, but it can’t cure the underlying disease”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“The Shrinking Legacy of a Supreme Court Justice: Why veneration of Oliver Wendell Holmes is in decline.” Law professor John Fabian Witt has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“The Supreme Court showdown over LGBTQ discrimination, explained; On the surface, the stakes in this case seem enormous; In reality, they’re even larger”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“‘There is no protection’: case of trans woman fired after coming out could make history.” Dominic Rushe of The Guardian (UK) has this report.

“Comcast lawsuit in Supreme Court could cause ‘irreparable harm’ to minority protections, NAACP warns”: Valerie Russ and Bob Fernandez have this article in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Kansas moving closer to 2020 showdown over abortion after Supreme Court decision”: Jonathan Shorman has this front page article in today’s edition of The Wichita Eagle.

“High Court Case Tests Religious Schools’ Use of Tax-Credit Scholarships”: Mark Walsh of Education Week has this report.

“The Singular Relationship Between the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“Supreme Court Enjoys Majority Approval at Start of New Term”: Lydia Saad of Gallup has this report.

“Dan Markel case: Luis Rivera back on the stand.” Karl Etters of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“‘Harry. Stay Awake.’ Supreme Court Justices Caught Passing Notes. Handwritten notes that justices gave to each other are becoming public; ‘Griffey flied out to center, w/bases loaded. NO SCORE.'” Jess Bravin will have this front page article in tomorrow’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“New SCOTUS petition: CFPB enforcement must be undone if agency is unconstitutional.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post about a petition for writ of certiorari before judgment filed yesterday.

“Harvard doesn’t discriminate against Asian-Americans in admissions, judge rules”: Deirdre Fernandes of The Boston Globe has this report.

Anemona Hartocollis of The New York Times reports that “Harvard Admissions Process Does Not Discriminate Against Asian-Americans, Judge Rules.”

Nick Anderson of The Washington Post reports that “Federal judge rules Harvard does not discriminate against Asian Americans in admissions.”

Melissa Korn of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Judge Rules Harvard’s Race-Conscious Admissions Policy Constitutional; Federal judge finds university doesn’t intentionally discriminate based on race in admissions.”

Collin Binkley of The Associated Press reports that “Federal judge upholds affirmative action at Harvard.”

Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “U.S. judge rejects claim Harvard discriminates against Asian-American applicants.”

Patricia Hurtado of Bloomberg News reports that “Harvard Defeats Suit Seeking to Bar Race-Conscious Admission.”

And Salvador Hernandez of BuzzFeed News reports that “Harvard University Is Allowed To Use Race As A Factor In Its Admissions Process, A Judge Ruled; A federal lawsuit accused the Ivy League school of discriminating against Asian American students by considering race in its admissions standards.”