“Appeals Court Reverses Live Nation Win in Run-D.M.C. Merchandise Suit; The panel finds the merchandiser’s summary judgment win on issues of willful infringement was premature”: Ashley Cullins has this post at the “THR, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

“Appeals court formally nullifies Texas abortion restrictions”: The Associated Press has this report on a per curiam ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued today.

“Faith and military duty: Do they conflict?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Court: Hobby Lobby ruling OKs some employment discrimination.” Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this blog post today.

“Asking Judges to Decide Who’s Bisexual Is Messy”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg View.

And online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has an essay titled “Court Holds Bisexual Asylum Seeker Isn’t Actually Bisexual, Drawing Withering Dissent.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s Seventh Circuit ruling appears here and here.

“The Supreme Court Doesn’t Care if You’re Busy”: Kimberly Robinson of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

“College Athletes Lose Appeal Over Use of Their Images in Game Broadcasts; The 6th Circuit opines that athletes don’t have publicity right interests in sports broadcasts”: Eriq Gardner has this post at the “THR, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter about a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Unusual request for divorce at the heart of Kentucky case”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Appeals Court Adds an Interesting Footnote to Bill Cosby Scandal; An appeals court won’t re-seal Cosby court documents, but seems to suggest that a federal judge was wrong in letting his deposition become public in the first place.” Eriq Gardner has this post at the “THR, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter.

“In re batty boy bisexual case”: An eagle-eyed “How Appealing” reader has sent me an email bearing that title, referencing this post of mine from last night.

The email begins:

Thanks for your heroic work. But for you I would never have read the Jamaican deportation case, among other delights.

An under-reported issue in the case — is the IJ in the case below a man or a woman? Wood, writing for the majority refers to the IJ as “she,” but Posner refers to the IJ as “he.” Typo, unintentional ironic jab at the IJ, or is something more important going on here?

Let me begin by disclaiming any suggestion that running an appellate law blog is “heroic work.” Maniacally obsessive work perhaps, but heroic not so much.

Turning to the reader’s substantive point, it is indeed ironic in a case in which Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner‘s dissenting opinion affirmatively criticized the Immigration Judge for being unaware of the meaning of “bisexual” that the authors of the majority and dissenting opinions cannot even agree over whether male or female pronouns should be used to refer to the IJ. Perhaps a quick visit to PACER by one of this blog’s many readers to review the case filings in this appeal would clear-up any uncertainty surrounding the IJ’s gender. Should more information arrive via email on this subject, I will provide an update.

Update: As several readers have noted, Judge Posner has today updated his dissent to refer to the IJ using female pronouns, confirming that the IJ who decided the case was a woman. An excerpt of Judge Posner’s original, uncorrected dissent referring to the IJ using male pronouns appears in this tweet containing a snapshot of the dissent as originally issued.

“Legal scholars debate loss of regional seat at Supreme Court of Canada; Is regional representation antiquated or essential?” Nina Corfu of CBC News has this report.

And online at The Toronto Sun, columnist Mark Bonokoski has an essay titled “Supreme Court will never get the best of the best.”

“How 400 Pages of Porny Emails Upended Pennsylvania Politics”: Mike Pearl of Vice.com has this report.

“Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor visits Anchorage during Alaska vacation”: Daniella Rivera of CBS News affiliate KTVA-11 of Anchorage has this report.

And NBC News affiliate KTUU-2 of Anchorage reports that “Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor visits Anchorage.”

“What a Trumpian Supreme Court Might Look Like: Would justices appointed by Trump be able to restrain him?” Law professors John Yoo and Jeremy Rabkin have this essay online today at National Review.

“Voting Rights Success? Not So Fast.” Deuel Ross has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“The Courts Begin to Call Out Lawmakers”: Linda Greenhouse has this essay online today at The New York Times.