“Supreme Court to decide when state voter purges cross the line”: Tony Pugh of McClatchy DC has this report.

“State Asks U.S. Supreme Court To Take Case Involving Abusive Language”: Edmund H. Mahony of The Hartford Courant has an article that begins, “In a case that implicates free speech, fighting words and the coarsening of public discourse, state prosecutors are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate a 25-day jail term on a Rockville woman convicted of upsetting public order by flinging disgustingly vile insults at a grocery store manager.”

“Justin Trudeau should name an Indigenous justice to the Supreme Court”: The Toronto Star has posted this editorial online.

“After Supreme Court detour, Apple v. Samsung goes to a fourth jury trial; Apple wields design as a weapon, a strategy that has led to judicial paralysis”: Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has this report.

“Is Oral Argument Dying in the Circuits?” Tessa L. Dysart has this post at the “Appellate Advocacy Blog.”

“Dismissal of $472 million verdict v. J&J is disaster for talc plaintiffs”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

In the November 2017 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Speech, religion and bias all weighed in Masterpiece Cakeshop case.”

And Lorelei Laird has an article headlined “Native Hawaiians wage an ongoing battle to organize into a sovereign nation.”

“DOJ says it’s settled ‘contraception mandate’ cases; Trump’s move to broaden exemption paved way for resolution”: Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times has this report.

And Ema O’Connor and Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News report that “The Trump Administration Just Settled More Than A Dozen Lawsuits Over Obama’s Contraception Mandate.”

“A Vision of Our Post-Roe Future: The government’s ban on abortions for undocumented minors is a preview of an America with one more conservative Supreme Court justice.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court Notebook: Justices’ security focus of lawsuit.” Jessica Gresko and Mark Sherman of The Associated Press have this report.

“A Gay Couple Just Asked The Supreme Court To Rule Against A Christian Baker”: Dominic Holden of BuzzFeed News has this report.

You can view here and here the Briefs for Respondents filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Second Circuit holds that a notice of appeal can sometimes substitute for a petition for permission to appeal under 28 U.S.C. sec. 1292(b): You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

Ninth Circuit decides whether the “right of taking fish” includes whales and seals under the Treaty of Olympia: Today’s ruling answers “yes,” even while recognizing that now “scientists tell us sea mammals are not fish.”

Ninth Circuit rejects First Amendment challenge to Montana’s limits on the amount of money individuals, political action committees, and political parties may contribute to candidates for state elective office: You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, reversing a district court’s ruling to the contrary, at this link.

Update: At his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen discusses the ruling in a post titled “In Major Victory in Case with National Significance, Ninth Circuit on 2-1 Vote Upholds Montana Contribution Limits; Judge Bea Would Appear to Hold *All* Limits Unconstitutional.”

Specific personal jurisdiction and the purposeful availment test in the Ninth Circuit: A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this ruling today.

“A Conversation with Justice Elena Kagan, Oct. 16, 2017, Chicago-Kent College of Law”: The Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Institute of Technology has posted the video of this recent event on YouTube at this link.

“Supreme court to hear challenge to Northern Ireland abortion law; Amnesty International among organisations and individuals bringing case on human rights grounds”: Henry McDonald of The Guardian (UK) has this report.

“The Single Most Unremarked Win of the Trump Era: Kristen Clarke of the National Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law on the federal judiciary.” Slate recently posted online this new installment of its “Amicus” podcast featuring Dahlia Lithwick.

“Tuesday hearing may hold clues to whether Supreme Court thinks school-funding case closed”: Neal Morton of The Seattle Times has this report.

“‘Front Row Kids’ and values have taken over our courts:The problem is not just that Back Row America’s values won’t be considered — it’s that the Supreme Court may not even realize it’s ignoring them.” Law professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds has this essay online at USA Today.

“Robert Bork’s Second Amendment”: Mark Pulliam has this post at the blog of the Library of Law and Liberty.

“The Travel Ban and the Rational Basis Test”: Josh Blackman has this post at the “Lawfare” blog.

“He Didn’t Vote in a Few Elections. In the Next One, Ohio Said He Couldn’t.” Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Detained immigrant teen asks full appeals court to let her get abortion”: Samantha Schmidt of The Washington Post has this report.

David Lauter of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Immigrant abortion case heads back to court.”

Greg Toppo of USA Today reports that “ACLU asks federal court to reconsider block on undocumented teen’s abortion.”

Rebecca Savransky of The Hill reports that “Undocumented teen asks full appeals court to step in, allow abortion.”

And at the “Daily Intelligencer” blog of New York Magazine, Cristian Farias has a post titled “The Case of the Undocumented Teen Who Wants an Abortion Is a Constitutional Hellhole for Trump.”

You can access at this link the emergency petition for rehearing en banc filed last night in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The federal government’s answer was due minutes ago, and I will link to it once it becomes available online.

Update: The federal government’s answer in opposition to the petition for rehearing en banc can be accessed here.