“The Supreme Court’s Shattered Precedents Are Coming Back to Haunt It”: Law professor Aaron Tang has this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Pauline Newman Disability Probe Transferred to Eleventh Circuit”: Michael Shapiro of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access).

You can view today’s order disclosing the proceeding at this link.

“Judge’s active role at PR firm prompts ethics complaint from senators; Democratic Sens. Chris Coons and Lisa Blunt Rochester are calling out Judge Jennifer Mascott for actively managing a Washington public affairs firm while on the bench”: Daniel Barnes and Jacob Wendler of Politico have this report.

You can access the judicial misconduct complained at this link.

“Oil Companies Are Begging the Supreme Court to Let Them Off the Hook For Climate Change; State courts might be the last, best hope for holding polluters accountable”: Madiba K. Dennie has this essay online at Balls and Strikes.

“Lurching Through The Audition Trap; Do we reward judges who audition or who refuse to audition?” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Justice Scalia’s originalist gambit”: Steven Gow Calabresi has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Zombie Originalism: Samuel Alito’s efforts to revamp the conservative legal philosophy reveal that a new movement is ascendant.” Law professor Jack Goldsmith has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“What Is Originalism? | Interview: Sherif Girgis.” You can access today’s new episode of the “Advisory Opinions” podcast via this link and on YouTube.

“Justice Samuel Alito on Originalism, ‘Speechifying’ Colleagues, and Media Caricatures”: Wall Street Journal Opinion has posted this video on YouTube.

“Mail Order Abortion Pill at Stake as Red States Go to High Court”: Ian Lopez of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Supreme Court’s Alito Says a Democratic Senate Win Won’t Prompt Quick Retirement”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“The Supreme Court’s Gift to Trump”: Jeffrey Toobin has this guest essay online at The New York Times.

“256. So Unexplained: Justice Alito’s Non-Responsive Emergency Docket Defense; Justice Alito‘s new book purports to answer the Court’s shadow docket critics — by rebutting a caricature and by ignoring the ways in which his own behavior has contradicted nearly every claim he makes.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit; Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger said Krasner made a series of “misstatements” about them. Krasner denied that and said the duo has been insubordinate”: Chris Palmer and Ellie Rushing of The Philadelphia Inquirer have this report.

“Fifth Circuit wrestles with constitutionality of warrantless Flock searches; The government argues that public actions captured by Flock cameras aren’t subject to the Fourth Amendment”: Christina van Waasbergen of Courthouse News Service has this report.

You can access the audio of today’s oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.

“The Epstein law was a historic mistake; The measure failed to expose the promised sex-trafficking ring — and did a lot of collateral damage”: Ankush Khardori has this essay online at The Boston Globe.

“This Supreme Court case is much bigger than oil and gas; Local emissions rules shouldn’t be used to shake down companies for conduct occurring elsewhere”: Michael Toth has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“I Know Christa Pike’s Medical History. What Tennessee Did Is Unforgivable.” Joel Zivot has this guest essay online at The New York Times.

“When Can You Sue if Your 401(k) Underperforms? Investors sought to hedge risk and got lower returns; Now the Supreme Court will hear their case.” Jay Rogers will have this op-ed in Tuesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“How Trump Can — and Cannot — Still Mess With the Midterms”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen has this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“In the next chapter of Harvard v. Trump, cases mount in federal appeals court; The First Circuit US Court of Appeals in Boston is the latest battleground for the legal fight between the administration and university”: Michaela Towfighi of The Boston Globe has this report.

And Erik Uebelacker of Courthouse News Service has a report headlined “At First Circuit, Trump admin disputes judge’s authority to restore research funding to Harvard; The Trump administration froze $2.6 billion in the school’s grant funding on the basis that it didn’t crack down hard enough on pro-Palestine protestors in 2024.”

You can access the audio of today’s oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit at this link.

“Opening the book on the October Term 2026”: Mark Walsh has this View from the Court post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Supreme Court grapples with case on holding Big Oil liable for climate change; After more than two hours of argument, it was unclear whether the justices would green-light Boulder, Colorado’s novel lawsuit against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy”: Justin Jouvenal of The Washington Post has this report.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court sounds wary of state-based climate change suits against oil producers.”

James Romoser of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Questions Oil Companies’ Bid to Shut Down Climate Lawsuits; Justices debate whether local governments can sue energy giants for harms linked to climate change.”

Maureen Groppe of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court debates whether to toss climate change lawsuits against big oil.”

Alex Swoyer and Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times report that “Supreme Court wades into climate change dispute between energy companies and states.”

Lawrence Hurley of NBC News reports that “New Supreme Court term begins with justices stumped by climate change case; The justices heard arguments in a lawsuit brought by Boulder, Colorado, seeking to hold Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy liable for the impacts of climate change.”

Devin Dwyer of ABC News reports that “Justices divided over climate change case and liability for oil producers; The case is over alleged marketing deception and climate change impacts.”

Lesley Clark and Alex Guillén of Politico report that “Missing justice scrambles Supreme Court oil liability fight; Alito’s recusal from the case has the potential to result in a tied ruling in a battle over oil companies’ liability to pay for climate impacts.”

Lindsay Whitehurst and Matthew Daly of The Associated Press report that “Supreme Court weighs local governments’ climate change lawsuits against oil and gas companies.”

John Kruzel and Andrew Chung of Reuters report that “US Supreme Court wrestles with oil companies’ bid to scuttle climate lawsuit.”

And Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service reports that “Supreme Court showdown leaves future of climate lawsuits up in the air; The Supreme Court appeared to end its inaugural argument of the 2026 term with more questions than answers on Monday as the justices considered the perils of intervening in lawsuits seeking to hold oil companies accountable for climate change.”

“Justice Alito: Originalist in Full; Justice Samuel A. Alito’s new book, So Ordered: An Originalist’s View of the Constitution, the Court, and Our Country, is not a conventional judicial memoir — and that is precisely its strength.” Charles Stimson has this post at Civitas Outlook.

“It’s a New Supreme Court Term, and Democracy Is Again at Risk; The right-wing justices have little regard for Americans being able to vote or be fairly represented”: Jesse Wegman has this post at his “Major Questions” Substack site.

“Oil companies face a skeptical SCOTUS in their effort to stop Boulder’s climate change lawsuit; With Justice Alito recused, eight justices questioned if they should be hearing the case and pushed back on Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil’s broad constitutional arguments”: Chris Geidner has this post at his Substack site.

“Congress Is Supposed to Be More Powerful Than the Supreme Court. Why Isn’t It? Trump and his allies in the Capitol have revealed a problem that has been developing for decades.” Emily Bazelon has this essay online at The New York Times Magazine.

“Any judge who abuses his office to promote his own interests — including the desire for future appointment — has violated the judicial oath and doesn’t belong in his current post, let alone whatever new post he seeks.” So wrote Fifth Circuit Judge James C. Ho in a concurring opinion issued last Friday.

In news coverage, Jacqueline Thomsen of Bloomberg Law reports that “James Ho Says Judges Can’t Fight ‘Auditioning’ Claims in Opinion” (subscription required for full access).

“Chattels have no right to the Great Writ.” So holds the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in a non-precedential judgment order issued today in the case captioned Nonhuman Rights Project v. Zoological Society.

“Ask Jeeves: How would The Butler vote?” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Federal Circuit Judge Raymond Clevenger Retires After 36 Years”: Michael Shapiro of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“The Supreme Court Allows Third-Country Deportations to Continue”: You can access today’s new episode of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast via this link and on YouTube.

“Extended interview: Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.” CBS News has posted this video on YouTube.

“Sullivan & Cromwell taps new Supreme Court practice leaders”: Sara Merken of Reuters has this report.

And Meghan Tribe of Bloomberg Law report that “Sullivan & Cromwell Nabs Ashurst, McGuireWoods Appellate Chairs.”

“How the Midterms Could Complicate the Supreme Court’s New Term; Even before the justices start their new term on Monday, the court has spent the summer resolving fast-moving requests on election-related disputes”: Ann E. Marimow and Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times have this report.