Majority opinion by Easterbrook, dissent by Posner: Rulings of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit that meet this description are typically worth a look. One such decision issued today.

“State of Alaska defends gay-marriage ban”: The Associated Press has this report.

Dan Packel of Law360.com reports on two of my cases today: Dan’s first article is headlined “Pa. Superior Court Won’t Rehear $10M Motrin Verdict” (subscription required for full access). My most recent earlier coverage of this case, in which I serve as appellate counsel for plaintiffs, can be accessed here.

And Dan’s second article is titled “Preemption Trend Favors Pharma In Generic Reglan Fight” (subscription required for full access). My most recent coverage of this case, in which I serve as appellate counsel for plaintiffs, can be accessed here.

“Federal Court Declines to Take Up Wisconsin’s Voter ID Law”: Monica Davey will have this article in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times.

And Bloomberg News reports that “Wisconsin ID Ruling Withstands Appellate Rehearing Bid.”

“Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire: Together, Charles and David Koch control one of the world’s largest fortunes, which they are using to buy up our political system; But what they don’t want you to know is how they made all that money.” This article appears in the current issue of Rolling Stone magazine.

“2nd Circuit to define ‘original information’ for SEC whistleblowers”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report today.

“Preferential hiring of Navajo at mine ruled OK”: Howard Fischer of The Arizona Daily Star has a news update that begins, “Indian nations are free to demand that private firms doing business on reservation land give preference to tribal members despite anti-discrimination laws, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, written by Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel, at this link.

And the blog “Turtle Talk” offers access to the appellate briefs and other materials via this link.

Ninth Circuit grants rehearing en banc in Arizona judicial candidate campaign free speech case: You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granting rehearing en banc at this link.

My coverage of the earlier ruling of a divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel in this case can be accessed here.

Guess the next Solicitor General of the United States: Thanks to those readers who have sent in their predictions on who the next Solicitor General might be if the current one is indeed promoted to become Attorney General. Because today is a bit of a quiet day for various reasons, I might refrain from posting responses until 3 p.m. Monday afternoon.

Those wishing to offer their best guess(es) for publication at this blog can email me at appellateblog@hotmail.com. I will not publish the name or otherwise describe or identify anyone who chooses to respond. And for those who prefer that competitions have rules, the one rule of this competition is that you can’t nominate yourself.

“Marvel, Jack Kirby Estate Settlement Brings End to High-Stakes Battle; Why a battle over Spider-Man, X-Men, and the Avengers was important”: At the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner has a post that begins, “On Friday, Marvel ended a long and bitter feud with the estate of comic book legend Jack Kirby, announcing a settlement just days before the U.S. Supreme Court had scheduled a conference to discuss whether to take up a case with potentially billions on the line.”

Update: In other coverage, Reuters reports that “Comic book legend Jack Kirby’s heirs settle with Marvel.”

“2nd Circ. Jeopardizes Fund’s Buy Of $230M Madoff Claim”: Law360.com has this report (subscription required for full access) reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.

Paul D. Clement argued the appeal against Kathleen M. Sullivan in May 2014.

Writings of interest in the Summer 2014 issue of The Green Bag: In addition to the Ex Ante item titled “Bashman and the Judges,” the current issue contains the following:

• Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky has an article titled “Appearances Can Be Deceiving: October Term 2013 Moved the Law to the Right“;
• Brianne J. Gorod has a separate October Term 2013 retrospective titled “A Year of Contradictions“;
• Jonathan Mermin has an article titled “Bad Arguments“;
• Kiel Brennan-Marquez has an article titled “Going Through the Motions” about a rejection letter that he received from The Yale Law Journal;
• And Senior U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby (D. Me.) has an item titled “Beatitudes and Jeremiads.”

“Argument preview: Justices to mull pleading standard for removal.” Ronald Mann has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Why You Can’t Trust The Supreme Court, In Three Quotes”: At ThinkProgress, Ian Millhiser has a post that begins, “Lawyers who are hoping to bring a case to the Supreme Court typically claim that the law is on their side, and they generally rely on citations to legal authorities and doctrines to prove this point. It’s not every day that an attorney states openly to a reporter that he thinks he’s going to win his case because he expects the justices to behave like partisan hacks.”

“Attorney general confirmation process is fractious even before it’s begun”: Paul Kane and Juliet Eilperin have this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

In today’s edition of The New York Times, Michael D. Shear has an article headlined “Eric Holder Resigns, Setting Up Fight Over Successor.”

Glenn Thrush of Politico Magazine has an article headlined “Why Holder Quit: The backstory of how Obama lost his ‘heat shield.’”

And at the “Behind the News” blog of Columbia Journalism Review, David Uberti has a post titled “Reporters jump the gun on Eric Holder replacement speculation; After news broke of the attorney general’s resignation, journalists got ahead of themselves.”

Majority on en banc Fifth Circuit holds no punies for injured seamen under under either the Jones Act or general maritime law: The en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit yesterday issued this 9-to-6 ruling.

A reader of this blog offers this helpful summary of the decision: “The majority holds that seamen and their estates may not recover punitive damages for their employer’s willful and wanton breach of the maritime law duty to provide a seaworthy vessel. The majority and dissent offer competing theories of statutory displacement of general maritime law and differ, more broadly, over the role federal courts should assume in the creation and development of federal maritime law.”

“Breaking: 7th Cir. Denies Rehearing En Banc in WI Voter ID Case on an Equally Divided Vote: Analysis.” Law professor Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law” blog.

Today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit concludes:

A judge called for a vote on the request for a hearing en banc. That request is denied by an equally divided court. Chief Judge Wood and Judges Posner, Rovner, Williams, and Hamilton voted to hear this matter en banc. In the coming days, members of the court may file opinions explaining their votes.

In early news coverage, Jason Stein of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that “Bid to get full Appeals Court hearing on voter ID falls 1 vote short.”

“Why This Conservative Lawyer Thinks He Can Still Cripple Obamacare”: Sahil Kapur of TPM DC has this report today.

“Superheroes’ copyright fight may reach Supreme Court”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

Now for the question that’s really on everyone’s mind this morning: If Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. becomes the next Attorney General of the United States, who will President Obama nominate to be the next Solicitor General of the United States?

Your best guesses, for publication at this blog, are hereby solicited via email to appellateblog@hotmail.com. I will not publish the name or otherwise describe or identify anyone who chooses to respond.

In related coverage, Vox has a report titled “2 things you need to know about Don Verrilli, the frontrunner to be Attorney General.”

And for those who may have forgotten or missed it, last October “SCOTUSblog” had a five-part video interview with Solicitor General Verrilli. You can view the complete interview via YouTube at this link.

“The Two Newest SCOTX Justices Discuss the Unpredictable Nature of Their Court”: John Council will have this article in Monday’s edition of Texas Lawyer.

You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

“Ohio plans to appeal anti-lie ruling”: The Cincinnati Enquirer has this report.

“Gaming the Supreme Court: Which state has the best chance of making gay marriage the law of the land?” Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“State goes to U.S. Supreme Court to stop expanded early voting”: The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch has this report.

Jim Provance of The Toledo Blade reports that “U.S. Supreme Court is asked to stay early vote decision.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Ohio asks US Supreme Court to delay voting order.”

“The Supreme Court Is Looking Out for the Rights of the Majority; In the last term, conservative justices moved to protect wealthy donors and Christians, while looking skeptically on claims for minorities”: Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online today at The Atlantic.

“Ex-justice Orie Melvin asks state Supreme Court to hear her appeal”: Paula Reed Ward has this article in today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

And today’s edition of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review contains an article headlined “Former justice Joan Orie Melvin to appeal conviction to state Supreme Court.”

“The Supreme Court Has Two Ways to Legalize Gay Marriage. This One Is Better.” Yishai Schwartz has this essay online at The New Republic.

In related news coverage, Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Justices poised to tackle constitutional right of same-sex marriage.”

And The Times-Picayune of New Orleans reports that “Louisiana gay marriage case on fast track at appeals court.”