“Who Should Argue Gay Marriage at SCOTUS? There’s One Obvious Choice.” Mark Joseph Stern has this essay online at Slate.

“Christie says Democrats won’t let him reshape high court”: The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report.

“Madoff trustee to high court: Ruling blocking $4B in payouts.” The Associated Press has this report.

“Dueling petitions at SCOTUS cite circuit split on foreign antitrust”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

Thomas C. Goldstein’s cert. petition in one of the cases that is the subject of Frankel’s article concludes with a particularly harsh and seemingly personal attack (see, for example, footnote seven of the petition) on Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner. Only time will tell whether Goldstein’s attempt at making certain justices angry with Judge Posner based on what Posner said about those justices in his capacity as commentator will cause the Court to be more interested or less interested in choosing this case as the vehicle for deciding the antitrust conflict presented.

“N.J. Supreme Court strikes down part of bias-intimidation law”: The Record of Hackensack, New Jersey has a report that begins, “The New Jersey Supreme Court struck down on Tuesday a section of the state’s bias-intimidation law that allowed a jury to convict a defendant even when bias did not motivate a crime as long as the victim believed he or she was targeted based on race, color, national origin or ethnicity.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of New Jersey at this link.

“A closer look at the Third Circuit’s recent en banc cases”: Matthew Stiegler has this post today at his “CA3blog.”

“N.J. spars with sports leagues once again over sports betting in federal appeals court”: NJ.com has this report.

“Gay marriage case could offer 15 minutes of fame”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Seven-lawyer line-up for same-sex marriage hearings?”

RAP mogul on my list of top-ten federal appellate judicial writers: It’s time for me to reveal a fourth judge on my unranked list of the ten best opinion writers currently serving on the U.S. Courts of Appeals.

Even before “Notorious R.B.G.” was a glimmer in the eye of the yet-to-be-launched Tumblr web site, this judge’s actual initials spelled RAP. In December 2016, he will celebrate his 35th anniversary as a federal appellate judge. If any one judge can be singled-out for demonstrating that judicial opinions can be interesting no matter what issues happen to be involved, and for showing that appellate writing in general doesn’t have to be dreadful to read, in my view the lion’s share of the credit belongs to him.

I have been a huge fan of Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner‘s writing since I was in law school. In the February 2002 installment of my “Upon Further Review” column published in The Legal Intelligencer, I described “Seventh Circuit Judges Richard A. Posner, Frank H. Easterbrook and Terence T. Evans” as “appellate judges who are excellent writers and thinkers.”

Since then, Judge Posner kindly participated in this blog’s “20 questions for the appellate judge” interview feature, producing a must-read interview, and he and I even locked horns (see here and here) over the arcane subject of ostrich heads, spawning two posts (see here and here) from Mark Liberman at the amazing “Language Log” blog.

In the finest tradition of the legal profession, Judge Posner appears even to have created something of an online shrine to himself. Without question, an impressive crop of individuals have recently joined the ranks of the federal appellate judiciary, and in the years ahead many of them may find their way onto my list of the ten best opinion writers serving on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. But so long as Judge Posner continues to issue decisions with his usual aplomb, there will remain a spot for him on this top-ten list.

“Marriage Equality Advocates Stall On Decision About Who Will Argue At Supreme Court”: Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed has this report.

Listen to Theodore B. Olson v. Paul D. Clement in oral argument today at the Third Circuit: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has posted the oral argument audio online at this link (29.1 MB mp3 audio file).

In early news coverage, The Record of Hackensack, New Jersey reports that “Three-judge panel hears appeal of N.J. sports betting.”

And The Associated Press reports that “New Jersey, leagues renew court tussle over sports gambling.”

“Attorney general candidate Lynch faces tough test in U.S. Senate”: Reuters has a report that begins, “President Barack Obama’s choice of Loretta Lynch to be the next top U.S. law enforcement official is ensnared in infighting over abortion and immigration policy and, if that can be overcome, a tight vote once her nomination arrives before the Senate.”

“The trial has become Silicon Valley’s version of Anita Hill’s Senate testimony during Clarence Thomas’s 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearing.” So writes Brad Stone of Bloomberg News in an article headlined “The Trial That Makes Silicon Valley Shudder: Ellen Pao’s victory is nowhere near assured, but her case will echo in the tech industry for a long time.”

“Court rights racial injustice against law pioneer after 125 years”: Bob Egelko has this front page article in today’s edition of The San Francisco Chronicle.

In today’s edition of The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz has a front page article headlined “Chinese immigrant denied California law license gets one 125 years late.”

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, Maura Dolan has an article headlined “Chinese immigrant, denied law license in 1890, gets one posthumously.”

Denny Walsh of The Sacramento Bee has an article headlined “125 years late, Chinese lawyer earns right to practice law in California.”

The Guardian (UK) has an article headlined “First to the bar: Chinese immigrant granted posthumous law licence; A California court has overturned the decision to grant Hong Yen Chang the right to practice in the state 125 years after refusing him admission on grounds of race.”

The Associated Press reports that “California court reverses century-old racist ruling.”

Reuters reports that “California grants posthumous law license to nation’s first Chinese-born lawyer.”

Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition” contained an audio segment titled “California Bar Grants Admission To Chinese Immigrant 125 Years Later.”

At the “At the Lectern” blog, David Ettinger has a post titled “Hong Yen Chang gets his law license, 125 years late, after Supreme Court acknowledges a ‘grievous wrong.’”

And the University of California, Davis yesterday issued a news release titled “California Supreme Court grants UC Davis School of Law petition, admits Chinese lawyer posthumously.”

You can access yesterday’s unanimous, unsigned opinion of the Supreme Court of California at this link.

“Who will fight for gay marriage at SCOTUS?” Ariane de Vogue of CNN.com has this report.

“Constitution Check: Who will blink first on same-sex marriage in Alabama?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“First Amendment ‘Giant’ Floyd Abrams Calls Higher Education the Next Battleground over Free Speech in 2015 Adams Lecture”: The Temple University Beasley School of Law issued this news release yesterday.

And today at the “Concurring Opinions” blog, Ronald K.L. Collins has a post titled “FAN 51.5 (First Amendment News) Floyd Abrams on ‘the greatest threats to free speech in this country.’”

“Opponents of N.J. sports gambling to make case today”: The Record of Hackensack, New Jersey has this report.

“Exclusive: Complete 911 Audio At Odds With New ‘Self-Defense’ Claim by U.S. Judge Mark Fuller’s Attorney in 2014 Domestic Battery Incident.” This post appeared yesterday at “The Brad Blog.”

“Could Obama Bypass the Supreme Court?” Law professor William Baude has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

The Third Circuit also televises its oral arguments: In the hallway on the 19th floor of the James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse in Philadelphia –the floor on which both of the Third Circuit’s courtrooms are located — live oral argument video is displayed on two flat panel monitors attached to the wall that divides the hallway from the main courtroom.

“NCAA heads to U.S. appeals court over athlete pay”: Dan Levine of Reuters has this report.

Once the video of today’s oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit becomes available, I will link to it.