“Supreme Court Refuses To Tell The Senate To Do Its Job, While Merrick Garland Just Waits; It’s not really the court’s job to intervene in this political fight”: Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post has this report.

“Lawyers Can Write Shorter, But It’ll Cost Them”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“U.S. court reinstates Apple win over Samsung in patent case”: Andrew Chung of Reuters has a report that begins, “A federal appeals court on Friday reinstated a $120 million jury award for Apple Inc against Samsung, in another stunning twist in the fierce patent war between the world’s top smartphone manufacturers.

And Susan Decker of Bloomberg News reports that “Apple Wins Appeal Reinstating $119.6 Million Samsung Verdict.”

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

The en banc ruling is accompanied by three separate dissenting opinions. Coincidentally, each of the three dissenters were on the original three-judge panel, which reached a result opposite from the one that the remainder of the en banc court reached today. The case was not reargued at the en banc stage, and the majority opinion contains a stinging rebuke of the means that the original three-judge panel used to reverse the district court’s judgment in favor of Apple.

“‘One of the most important Supreme Court Justices ever’: Justices, academics dedicate Scalia Law School.” Nick Anderson has this entry at the “Grade Point” blog of The Washington Post.

On YouTube, George Mason University has posted a video titled “Elena Kagan Remarks at Antonin Scalia Law School Dedication” (via David Bernstein).

“Pa. court won’t halt ballot question on judge retirements; another appeal vowed”: Angela Couloumbis and Mari A. Schaefer have this article in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer. You can access Wednesday’s ruling of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

And in related commentary, in today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Berwood A. Yost has an op-ed titled “Wording matters on Pa.’s judicial ballot question.”