Programming note; On Thursday morning, I will be traveling to Chicago, where, on Friday, Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal and I will be guest speakers at the Supreme Court Clinic of the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law.

As a result, additional posts will appear here on Thursday afternoon. In the interim, appellate-related updates likely will appear on this blog’s Twitter feed.

Fourth Circuit affirms district court’s refusal to transfer juvenile for adult prosecution for murder in aid of racketeering because the mandatory penalties for that crime cannot lawfully be imposed on a juvenile: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“Supreme Court Seen Easing Path to Challenge Some Environmental Regulations; Justices to decide on case regarding restrictions under the Clean Water Act”: Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court sympathetic to property owner in wetlands dispute.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Justices Suggest Support for Landowners in Wetlands Case.”

And The Associated Press reports that “High court sympathetic to property owners in wetlands case.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., No. 15-290.

“The Supreme Court’s Plea for Health Insurance Help: The justices are split — and desperate to find a solution that works for religious nonprofits and the government in a battle over birth control.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at The Atlantic.

And online at The Los Angeles Times, Michael McGough has an essay titled “The Supreme Court floats a contraception compromise.”

“The Supreme Court needs a ninth justice immediately”: The Washington Post has this editorial.

“A Supreme Court Hijacking”: Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Supreme Court Rules Against Freezing Assets Not Tied to Crimes”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court limits when the government can freeze defendants’ assets.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court says ‘untainted’ assets of fraud suspects can be unfrozen, used to defend self.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Rules Assets Unrelated to Crimes Cannot Be Frozen; 5-3 decision found the right to counsel trumps government’s interest in preserving funds for restitution.”

James Rosen of McClatchyDC reports that “Supreme Court rules for Miami defendant in Medicare fraud case.”

Sam Hananel of The Asociated Press has an article headlined “Justices: Government can’t freeze assets unrelated to crimes.”

Matt Ford of The Atlantic has an article headlined “A Near-Epiphany at the Supreme Court: The justices come close to recognizing the perilous state of the American public-defense system.”

At Forbes.com, Daniel Fisher has a post titled “White-Collar Defendants Win As Supreme Court Protects ‘Untainted’ Money.”

And online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “You’re Presumed Innocent. Is Your Money?”

You can access at this link today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Luis v. United States, No. 14-419. And you can access the oral argument of the case via this link.

“The Reverse Bartleby: A modest proposal for how Merrick Garland can outfox Republican obstructionists.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Coffee juggler can’t sue Sheetz over scalding, Pa. court says”: Matt Miller of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has an article that begins, “Concluding that her own inadvisable juggling act led to her injury, a state appeals court panel has refused to revive a lawsuit by a student who spilled scalding coffee on herself at a Sheetz convenience store.”

You can access yesterday’s non-precedential ruling of a three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“White House maps out next phase of Court fight; The administration feels like it has the advantage — and plans to press the pace in April”: Edward-Isaac Dovere of Politico.com has this report.

And online at Politico Magazine, law professor Richard Primus has an essay titled “The Supreme Court: The Nightmare Scenario; A year without a justice is the least of our worries; We could be in for a full-scale constitutional meltdown.”

“How we’ll know who’s right about advice and consent”: Law professor Jamal Greene has this op-ed online at The Los Angeles Times.

“Constitution Check: If the Supreme Court splits 4-to-4, does anybody win?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Shirley Hufstedler, R.I.P.” Today at his “Southern California Appellate News” blog, Ben Shatz has a post that begins, “Shirley Hufstedler — a giant in the legal profession and of her generation — passed away this morning.”

In addition to her other accomplishments, Hufstedler served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from September 1968 to December 1979.

“‘Docs v. Glocks’ law heading to federal appeals court in June”: Jim Saunders of The News Service of Florida has an article that begins, “Readying for oral arguments in June, attorneys for the state and Second Amendment groups are urging a full federal appeals court to uphold a 2011 Florida law that would restrict doctors from asking questions and recording information about patients’ gun ownership.”

“Pa. court reverses death sentence in gruesome murder”: Michaelle Bond of The Philadelphia Inquirer has an article that begins, “The state Supreme Court reversed a death sentence of a Coatesville man convicted of fatally shooting his teenage neighbor in 2008 and dismembering the body with a chainsaw.”

And Michael Rellahan of The Daily Local News of West Chester, Pennsylvania reports that “Death penalty vacated in chain saw death in Coatesville.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of a unanimous Supreme Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“From judge to justice: the case for Merrick Garland.” Law professor Laurence H. Tribe has this essay online at The Boston Globe.

“Testing Territorial Limits: A crop of court cases could change the relationship between the United States and its territories.” Vann R. Newkirk II of The Atlantic has this report.

“Alabama’s Death Penalty Needs to Go: In light of the Supreme Court’s ruling against judicial override in Florida, one state remains where judges alone can decide life or death.” Ashley Cleek has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Pa. justice: Review Porngate emails of every judge and lawyer.” In today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Mark Fazlollah has a front page article that begins, “Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Debra McCloskey Todd said Tuesday that she had urged the Judicial Conduct Board and the disciplinary board for lawyers to review the emails of every judge and lawyer involved in the Porngate scandal, which has cost two of her colleagues their seats on the high court.”