“Supreme Court upholds Californian’s drug trafficking conviction that leaned on expert’s opinion”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Arrest Said to Be Politically Motivated; Sylvia Gonzalez, a Texas city councilwoman, said officials violated the First Amendment by arresting her after she criticized the city manager”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

And Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court sides with ex-councilwoman in her claim of retaliatory arrest.”

“Democrats seek to repeal Comstock abortion rule, fearing Trump crackdown; The Comstock Act, an 1873 law that bans abortion-related materials from being sent through the mail, could be used by the GOP to restrict abortion nationwide”: Dan Diamond and Caroline Kitchener of The Washington Post have this report.

“Supreme Court Upholds Trump-Era Tax Provision; The dispute, which was closely watched by experts, involved a one-time foreign income tax, but many saw it as a broader challenge to pre-emptively block Congress from passing a wealth tax”: Abbie VanSickle and Jim Tankersley of The New York Times have this report.

Ann E. Marimow and Julie Zauzmer Weil of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court upholds Trump-era tax provision on offshore earnings; Some viewed the challenge to the one-time tax on offshore earnings as an effort to preemptively block Congress from creating a wealth tax.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court upholds a tax on corporate wealth held overseas.”

Jess Bravin and Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Tax on Foreign Investments; Decision leaves open other questions over federal taxing powers.”

Maureen Groppe of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court decision saves Trump-era tax change, dodges big loss in federal tax revenue.”

And Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court rules against couple challenging part of Trump’s 2017 tax reforms.”

“A dispute between Egg Harbor and a popular restaurant has just been settled by the Wisconsin Supreme Court; The Door County village condemned a strip of property at Shipwrecked Brewpub to build a sidewalk, which the property owner claimed was illegal by state statute”: Christopher Clough of The Green Bay Press-Gazette has this report.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Ilya Somin has a post titled “Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Sidewalks are not ‘Pedestrian Ways’ — thus Allowing Local Governments to Use Eminent Domain to Take Property to Build Them; The close 4-3 decision might well become a staple of textbooks.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin at this link.

“Thou Shalt Not Post the Ten Commandments in the Classroom”: Columnist David French has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Unpublished Opinions: A Response to Judge Jerry Smith; Unpublished opinions are a growing threat to the rule of law.” Steven Calabresi had this post earlier today at “The Volokh Conspiracy.” He later retracted all the juicy parts.

“For Judge in Trump Documents Case, Unusual Rulings Are Business as Usual; Judge Aileen Cannon has repeatedly proven willing to hear out even far-fetched arguments from the former president’s legal team, including a challenge to the appointment of the special counsel, Jack Smith”: Alan Feuer and Eileen Sullivan of The New York Times have this news analysis.

“John Kerry Yodels for Alito Filibuster; His fellow Democrats cringe at his Davos folly”: Ed Whelan has this post at his “Confirmation Tales” Substack site.

“La.’s Ten Commandments law will test religion-friendly courts, experts say; The state’s Republican governor signed a measure requiring taxpayer-financed schools to prominently post a specific version of the commandments by Jan. 1”: Michelle Boorstein and Danielle Paquette of The Washington Post have this report.

“A Supreme Court Mistake on Wealth Taxes: Five Justices open the door to taxing unrealized gains in assets; Democrats will walk through it.” This editorial will appear in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

Online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a Jurisprudence essay titled “Why Brett Kavanaugh Shot Down a Fake Case That Would Have Blown Up the Tax Code.”

Online at Balls and Strikes, Jay Willis has an essay titled “The Conservative Justices Picked a Different Day to Kill a Wealth Tax; The Supreme Court’s opinion in Moore v. United States didn’t give conservative activists everything they wanted; But it gave them good reason to be optimistic about the future.”

And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “The Supreme Court’s new tax decision is great news for billionaires; Most of the justices voted not to blow up the US tax code, but the opinion has bad news for progressive proponents of wealth taxes.”

“Antonin Scalia’s Son Found a New Way to Exploit the Worst Loophole in the Court System”: Miles Mogulescu has this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Handing Down The Final 19 (or 17) Opinions; With a Presidential Debate on June 27!” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Judge in Trump Documents Case Rejected Suggestions to Step Aside; Two federal judges in South Florida privately urged Aileen M. Cannon to decline the case when it was assigned to her last year, according to two people briefed on the matter; She chose to keep it”: Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer of The New York Times have this report.

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

1. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court in Moore v. United States, No. 22-800. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a concurring opinion. Justice Amy Coney Barrett issued an opinion, in which Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., joined, concurring in the judgment. And Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Neil M. Gorsuch joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, No. 23-50. Justice Thomas issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined. And Justice Gorsuch issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court in Diaz v. United States, No. 23-14. Justice Jackson issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Gorsuch issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. And the Court issued a per curiam opinion in Gonzalez v. Trevino, No. 22-1025. Justice Alito issued a concurring opinion. Justice Kavanaugh issued a concurring opinion. Justice Jackson issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined. And Justice Thomas issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.