“What Supreme Court? Trump’s HHS pushes LGBT health rollback.” Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar of The Associated Press has this report.

“The Supreme Court should remind New Jersey why the U.S. discarded the Articles of Confederation”: Columnist George F. Will has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“State Supreme Court denies last-ditch appeal seeking Trump rally follows safety protocols to prevent COVID-19 outbreak”: Curtis Killman of The Tulsa World has this report.

Tim Willert of The Oklahoman reports that “Oklahoma Supreme Court OKs Trump campaign rally.”

Dave Boyer of The Washington Times reports that “Oklahoma Supreme Court rejects bid to stop Trump’s comeback rally.”

Pete Williams and Dareh Gregorian of NBC News report that “Oklahoma Supreme Court denies legal challenge to Trump rally; The plaintiffs had argued that having that many people inside the arena could cause coronavirus infections to surge in Tulsa.”

Adam Shaw of Fox News reports that “Oklahoma Supreme Court allows Trump rally to proceed as planned, as president says Tulsa curfew being lifted.”

And David Lee of Courthouse News Service reports that “Oklahoma High Court Refuses to Block Trump Rally in Tulsa.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma consists of an order and a concurring opinion.

“Aligning with liberals on DACA and LGBTQ rights, Chief Justice John Roberts asserts his independence”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Trump Can’t Immediately End DACA, Supreme Court Rules; The program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, protects people brought to the United States as children by shielding them from deportation and letting them work”: Adam Liptak and Michael D. Shear have this front page article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court blocks Trump’s bid to end DACA, a win for undocumented ‘dreamers.’”

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court rules for ‘Dreamers,’ rejects Trump’s repeal of immigration program.”

In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Brent Kendall, Jess Bravin, and Michelle Hackman have a front page article headlined “Trump’s Bid to End DACA Blocked by Supreme Court; High court grants relief to undocumented immigrants brought to U.S. as children, ruling 5-4 that administration didn’t provide sufficient reasons for canceling program.”

In today’s edition of USA Today, Richard Wolf has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court ruling upholds DACA program for young, undocumented immigrants.”

And in today’s edition of The Washington Times, Stephen Dinan has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court leaves DACA in place; justices say Trump cut corners to end program.”

“Law barring disclosure of actors’ ages violates 1st Amendment, appeals court rules”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

Dave McNary of Variety reports that “Appeals Court Upholds Ban on California’s Actor-Age Censorship Law.”

Erik Pedersen of Deadline reports that “Appeals Court Upholds Ruling Against California’s IMDb Age Law; Bill’s Sponsor SAG-AFTRA Calls Decision ‘Simply Ill-Informed.’”

Wendy Davis of Digital News Daily reports that “Appeals Court Strikes Down California Age Censorship Law.”

And at the “THR, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Ashley Cullins has a post titled “IMDb’s Age Censorship Win Affirmed by Appeals Court.”

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

“Tennessee legislature passes fetal heartbeat bill; Planned Parenthood, ACLU file lawsuit”: Natalie Allison of The Tennessean has this report.

And Kimberlee Kruesi of The Associated Press reports that “Tennessee advances 6-week abortion ban, lawsuit filed.”

“Roberts to Trump: Don’t Take the Supreme Court for Granted; A week of decisions contained hidden and not-so-hidden messages from the court.” Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Trump’s taking another run at DACA. And a Texas case is a real threat to the program. ‘We will be submitting enhanced papers shortly,’ the president said after the top court blocked him.” Pete Williams of NBC News has this report.

“Trump’s Corner-Cutting Fails Him as Supreme Court Losses Mount”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“Injunction in state ballot case upheld; Attorney: Appellate ruling means access for Libertarians.” Linda Satter of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has this report.

Max Brantley of Arkansas Times reports that “Libertarians win at 8th Circuit on ballot access lawsuit in Arkansas.”

And Joe Harris of Courthouse News Service reports that “Eighth Circuit Sides With Arkansas Libertarians in Ballot Access Suit.”

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

“Appeals court chides Euclid police’s ‘offensive’ training curriculum that included Chris Rock video, cartoon image of cop beating”: Eric Heisig of The Cleveland Plain Dealer has this report.

And Brian Flood of Bloomberg Law reports that “‘Highly Inappropriate’ Training Info Cited in Police Tasing Case” (subscription required for full access).

Circuit Judge John K. Bush — who was himself accused of inappropriate writings during his judicial confirmation process — issued yesterday’s ruling on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

“Central pastor lawsuit moot, but judge suggests state favoring protesters over churchgoers”: Lea Skene of The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday.

The judge to whom the headline refers is Circuit Judge James C. Ho, who issued a concurring opinion.

“Senate District 22 gerrymandering case will be heard by entire 5th Circuit Court”: Sarah Ulmer of Y’all Politics had this report back in September 2019.

Yesterday, the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued this two-paragraph per curiam decision dismissing the case as moot. But, because in these uncertain times we can all use as much reading material as possible, the dismissal is accompanied by three concurring opinions that total an additional 50 pages.