“Jurors unmoved by McDonnell’s appeal arguments”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “As former Gov. Bob McDonnell’s public corruption case goes before the U.S. Supreme Court, three of the jurors who convicted him say they remain certain they did the right thing.”

“Indiana Law Blog will be back online Monday”: Kristine Guerra of The Indianapolis Star had this article two weeks ago — which means, of course, that the “Indiana Law Blog” is now back in existence!

“Sex offenders win and lose in ‘peculiar’ rulings by the Kansas Supreme Court; The court overruled three of its own opinions issued on the same day”: Tony Rizzo of The Kansas City Star has an article that begins, “In an apparently unprecedented series of events, the Kansas Supreme Court on Friday overruled three of its own opinions, also released Friday, regarding the state’s sex offender registration laws. In three separate opinions issued Friday, the court found 2011 changes to the sex offender registry law cannot be applied retroactively to offenders convicted before the law took effect. But then in a fourth opinion, also released Friday, the court found that those rulings were incorrect.”

Justin Wingerter of The Topeka Capital-Journal reports that “Sex offender registry compared to ‘The Scarlet Letter’ in fiery Kansas Supreme Court opinions; Several 4-3 opinions show divide on the court over registration.”

And at his “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Douglas A. Berman has a post titled “Split Kansas Supreme Court, reversing itself in real time, ultimately decides that state’s lifetime sex offender registration law is constitutional.”

You can access here, here, here, and here yesterday’s four rulings of the Supreme Court of Kansas.

“Major Wisconsin cases could hang in balance at short-handed Supreme Court”: Patrick Marley of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently had an article that begins, “Having the U.S. Supreme Court short one justice for the foreseeable future could affect Wisconsin cases dealing with voter ID, abortion, an investigation of Gov. Scott Walker’s campaign and how legislative districts are drawn.”

“USPTO appeals to Supreme Court for ruling on racially tinged trademarks; Asian-American rock band won’t get its trademark until the high court weighs in”: Joe Mullin of Ars Technica has this report.

“Have some of the courts’ power been shifted to Congress?” Lyle Denniston has this post at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Because Texas law does not impose a duty of good faith and fair dealing in the student-university relationship, we affirm.” So holds a ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday.

“John Roberts Under Attack: The chief justice continues to be blamed for Merrick Garland not getting a Senate hearing.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online today at Slate.

Federal Circuit reinstates patent infringement suit brought against online ticketing companies Vivid Seats and Fandango: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit at this link.

“Appeals court tosses challenge to federal debt limit”: Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.

“Edwin Meese, former AG under Reagan, warns against confirming Garland”: David Sherfinski of The Washington Times has this report.

“Iran Accuses U.S. of Theft in $2 Billion Court Ruling for Terror Victims”: Rick Gladstone of The New York Times has this report.

Requirement that nonresident attorneys maintain office in New York State does not violate Privileges and Immunities Clause, Second Circuit rules: You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link. Although the Second Circuit rarely grants rehearing en banc, this case would seem to have as good of a chance as any for full-court review.

My coverage of the Second Circuit’s previous ruling in the case, from April 2014, can be accessed here.

“Antonin Scalia’s Rightful Revolution”: Law professor Stephen L. Carter has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“The strong interest in uniform application of the law means that we should usually follow unpublished decisions.” Fifth Circuit Judge Gregg Costa today issued a dissenting opinion that begins:

The strong interest in uniform application of the law means that we should usually follow unpublished decisions. But the difference between published and unpublished decisions must mean something. Otherwise, we should just “publish” everything and give all opinions the weight of binding authority.

You can access the majority opinion at this link.

“U.S. appeals decision striking down ban on offensive trademarks”: Reuters has a report (subscription required for full access) that begins, “Trademark officials may legitimately refuse to support the use of racial slurs without violating the First Amendment, the U.S. government said in a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday.”

You can access the petition for a writ of certiorari that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office filed yesterday in the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.

“Ashley Madison plaintiffs cannot sue anonymously over hack, judge says”: Reuters has this report.

“Abbott blasts Roberts, calls U.S. Supreme Court a ‘political body'”: Kevin Diaz of The Houston Chronicle has an article that begins, “Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, wading into the battle over President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy caused by the death of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, said Thursday that high court ‘deserves to be swept up into the political process.'”

“Minor Error, Major Effect”: Today at the U.S. Law Week blog, Nicholas Datlowe has a post that begins, “Late Wednesday afternoon, April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a minor correction to the majority opinion in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 2016 BL 123436 (U.S. April 19, 2016).”

“Originalist or Original: The Difficulties of Reconciling Citizens United With Corporate Law History.” Chief Justice Leo E. Strine, Jr. of the Supreme Court of Delaware and Nicholas Walter have this article in the current issue of the Notre Dame Law Review.

“2nd Circuit Says Couple Can’t Keep Stolen Jewel”: Nick Rummell of Courthouse News Service has an article that begins, “A couple who owned a diamond stolen by a disgraced celebrity stylist never had a legitimate title to the stone and can’t sue to keep it, the Second Circuit ruled.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

“Get In Line, SCOTUS. This Court Has Been Waiting 2,296 Days For A Judge. A single Republican senator is behind the delays.” Jennifer Bendery of The Huffington Post has an article that begins, “The Supreme Court has been waiting two months for the Senate to do something about its empty seat. If you think that sounds like a long time, you haven’t heard about the federal circuit court in Wisconsin. It’s been waiting more than six years for a judge, and it’s not looking like Republicans will give the court one anytime soon, either.”

“Blood Tests and Bad Lawyering: The Supreme Court finds unity in the face of bumbling attorneys and a tough Fourth Amendment case.” Mark Joseph Stern has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

“Supreme Court Questions Punishments for Refusing Drunken-Driving Tests; Justices suggest officers should get warrants before conducting chemical tests for intoxication”: Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

And Allison Sherry of The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that “Supreme Court takes hard look at Minn. implied-consent law; With the Supreme Court accepting the cases out of Minnesota and North Dakota, it appears the justices want to clear up the Fourth Amendment argument against unreasonable searches.”

“Supreme Court Upholds Arizona’s Redrawn Legislative Map”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court upholds Arizona redistricting plan.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Voting Districts Drawn by Independent Panel; Unanimous court rejects Republican claims map illegally favors Democrats.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court gives states leeway on political maps.”

Mary Jo Pitzl of The Arizona Republic reports that “Supreme Court upholds Arizona redistricting plan.”

Howard Fischer of The Arizona Daily Star has an article headlined “Supreme Court: Arizona’s redrawn legislative districts are legal.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court upholds Arizona legislative districts.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Backs Arizona Voting Map in Republican Setback.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com reports that “Supreme Court upholds Arizona legislative redistricting.”

And Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News reports that “Unanimous Supreme Court Sets High Bar For Challenging Redistricting Maps.”

“Court won’t force release of more drone-killing info”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has a blog post today that begins, “A federal appeals court has rebuffed an effort to force the Obama administration to release more information about its policies for using deadly drone strikes, but the administration appears to be on the verge of a voluntary effort to make public some more detail about the program.”

“High court nominee praises lawyers for helping the poor”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post reports that “Merrick Garland speaks — but not about the Supreme Court.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com reports that “Garland speech may signal new phase in confirmation effort.”

And Zoe Tillman of The National Law Journal reports that “In Rare Public Remarks, Garland Urges Lawyers to Close Justice Gap; Supreme Court nominee mum on confirmation clash in Senate.”

“Supreme Court Rules Iran Bank Must Pay for Terrorist Attacks”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court rules against Iranian bank over frozen assets.”

Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Upholds Terrorism Victims’ Ability to Collect Frozen Iran Funds; High court rejects challenge to law that intervened in pending court case.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN.com reports that “Supreme Court rules in favor of terror victims.”

Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post reports that “Supreme Court Rules For Congress — And Victims Of Iran-Sponsored Terrorism; The ruling means Iran’s central bank must pay terror claims.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Opinion analysis: A broad addition to Congress’s powers?”

“Racial Discrimination and Capital Punishment: The Indefensible Death Sentence of Duane Buck.” Lincoln Caplan has this post online today at The New Yorker.

“A Biglaw Associate’s Big Supreme Court Victory”: David Lat has this post at “Above the Law.”

“SCOTUS Makes Exception to No-Cell-Phone Policy”: Kimberly Robinson of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

“Supreme Court skeptical of drunken-driving breath tests without warrants”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

Online at Bloomberg View, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Even Drunken Drivers Have Rights.”

And at The Huffington Post, Evan Bernick has a blog entry titled “Supreme Court to Decide Whether States Can Make You Leave Your Fourth Amendment Rights at the DMV.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Birchfield v. North Dakota, No. 14-1468.

“Contraception-only plans are unworkable, Justice Dept. tells Supreme Court; Little Sisters say the government isn’t trying hard enough”: Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times has this report.

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Still a gap on Court’s birth-control idea.”

“Argument preview: Political favors as crimes.” Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Two Surprise Votes for the Power of Courts”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.