“With latest SJC pick, Baker faces history — and calls to meet the moment”: Matt Stout of The Boston Globe has this report.

“Chief Justice Roberts gave everyone something to call a win”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.

“In L.A. case, Supreme Court rules job discrimination laws don’t protect church-school teachers”: David G. Savage has this front page article in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Adam Liptak has an article headlined “Job Bias Laws Do Not Protect Teachers in Catholic Schools, Supreme Court Rules; The case was the court’s latest consideration of the relationship between the government and religion.”

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court affirms ‘ministerial exception’ that protects religious organizations from some lawsuits.”

And Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court upholds autonomy of religious employers in employment discrimination cases.”

“Supreme Court rules Muscogee (Creek) Nation historic boundaries never disestablished by Congress”: Curtis Killman of The Tulsa World has this report, along with an article headlined “Tribal law expert calls Supreme Court’s McGirt ruling ‘most important’ in state history.”

“Supreme Court Upholds Trump Administration Regulation Letting Employers Opt Out of Birth Control Coverage; The regulation was the latest attempt to undermine the ‘contraception mandate,’ a signature initiative of the Obama administration”: Adam Liptak has 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 says employers may opt out of Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate over religious, moral objections.”

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has an article headlined “Supreme Court upholds most of Trump rule to let religious employers end birth control coverage.”

In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall have a front page article headlined “Supreme Court Rulings Expand Exemptions for Religious Employers; Justices further elevate the right of religious exercise and the role of sectarian institutions in American society, in two separate rulings.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court allows religious, moral exemptions for employers opposed to contraceptives.”

In today’s edition of The Washington Times, Alex Swoyer has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court sides with Trump over Obamacare religious exemptions.”

And in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Jeremy Roebuck has a front page article headlined “U.S. Supreme Court hands victory to Trump in latest round of Pennsylvania’s birth-control wars.”

“The Supreme Court Teaches Trump the Limits of His Presidency”: Amy Davidson Sorkin has this post online at The New Yorker.

“Hail and farewell”: Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“The Political Genius of John Roberts: The chief justice stood up to Trump, placated Democrats, and scored indisputable points for judicial supremacy.” Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“In bias case, Jones Day pushes novel theory to block retaliation claim over press release”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds most lame-duck laws, throws out provisions on government documents”: Patrick Marley of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has an article that begins, “The state Supreme Court upheld many of the lame-duck laws that limited the power of the governor and attorney general Thursday, but the justices tossed out provisions that dictated how government documents had to be written.”

Riley Vetterkind of The Wisconsin State Journal reports that “Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds most lame-duck laws curbing powers of Tony Evers, Josh Kaul.”

Todd Richmond of The Associated Press reports that “Wisconsin Supreme Court OKs GOP-authored lame-duck laws.”

And Joe Kelly of Courthouse News Service reports that “Wisconsin Justices Uphold Most GOP Lame-Duck Laws.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin — totaling 144 pages — at this link.

“Judge asks appeals court to revive Michael Flynn case, permit review of DOJ dismissal”: Ann E. Marimow and Spencer S. Hsu of The Washington Post have this report.

Bryon Tau of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Judge Appeals Order to Dismiss Charges Against Michael Flynn; Former national security adviser had pleaded guilty to perjury before Justice Department moved to end case.”

Jeff Mordock of The Washington Times reports that “Trial judge in Flynn case asks appeals court to reconsider decision to drop prosecution.”

Colleen Long of The Associated Press reports that “DC judge asks for full appeal review of Flynn dismissal.”

Jan Wolfe of Reuters reports that “U.S. judge hearing Flynn case asks appeals court to reconsider dismissal.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Judge in Michael Flynn case wants full appeals court to rehear dismissal of charges; Judge Emmet Sullivan said three-judge panel’s ruling to dismiss charges against former national security adviser ‘threatens to turn ordinary judicial process upside down.’”

Katelyn Polantz of CNN reports that “Trial judge tries to keep Michael Flynn case alive in new request to appeals court.”

Gregg Re of Fox News reports that “Judge refuses to dismiss Flynn case, petitions full appellate court for review.”

Dan Mangan and Kevin Breuninger of CNBC report that “Judge asks full federal appeals court to reconsider decision forcing him to drop Michael Flynn case.”

And Harper Neidig of The Hill reports that “Judge asks appeals court to reconsider decision ordering him to dismiss Flynn charges.”

You can view at this link the petition for rehearing en banc filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

“Yes, Roberts Is In the Middle. No, He’s Not a Liberal.” Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law has this report.

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

“The Teflon Robe — Emboldened by Impunity: With ‘judges judging judges,’ rogues on the bench have little to fear; Secretive and cozy judicial oversight systems enable judges to subvert accountability in many states; Exhibit A: Oklahoma, where not a single judge was publicly disciplined in 14 years; When the state finally did charge a judge with wrongdoing, he was allowed to resign, his record pristine and his pension intact.” Michael Berens and John Shiffman of Reuters have this report, part two of a Reuters Investigates series.

“I join the opinion in full — even the cringy railroad puns!” So begins a concurring opinion that U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.), sitting by designation, issued yesterday, referring to Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke‘s opinion for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Seventh Circuit Keeps Indiana Smokable Hemp Ban Alive”: Joe Harris of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“The President’s Statements Did Not Declassify the Existence of the Covert Program”: So holds the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in its ruling today in New York Times v. Central Intelligence Agency.

“How the idea of religious freedom is being used to undermine other rights”: Law professor Nomi Stolzenberg has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

“People ask me if I’ve recovered from COVID-19. That’s not an easy question to answer.” David Lat has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

“US Supreme Court rules against Oklahoma in Creek Nation case”: Chris Casteel of The Oklahoman has this report.

Access online today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: Today is the final decision day of the October 2020 Term. Three cases remain for resolution.

1. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the Court in McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Samuel A. Alito, Jr. and Brett M. Kavanaugh joined in full and Justice Clarence Thomas joined in large measure. And Justice Thomas issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court in Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635. Justice Kavanaugh issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Gorsuch joined. And Justices Thomas and Alito issued dissenting opinions. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. And Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715. Justices Thomas and Alito issued dissenting opinions. You can access the oral argument via this link.

“What Does the Chief Justice Maximize?” John O. McGinnis has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“On Religion, the Supreme Court Protects the Right to Be Different; Recent decisions are about safeguarding pluralism, not taking sides in the culture wars”: Law professor Michael W. McConnell has this essay online at The New York Times.

“The Mindlessness of Bostock“: Steven D. Smith has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Further Finality Follies From the Fifth Circuit; The Fifth Circuit again demanded that parties obtain a Rule 54(b) certification when a claim has been dismissed without prejudice”: Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued Tuesday.