“The Supreme Court Will Lean Conservative Again: The Supreme Court is waiting — but not for much longer; After a year of changes in outlook, the justices now are waiting for Donald Trump to become president and name his nominee for the court.” Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News has this report.

“Kansas Supreme Court justices sworn in; importance of independent judiciary touted; Chief Justice Nuss says Kansans voted in November to maintain fair courts, rule of law”: Celia Llopis-Jepsen of The Topeka Capital-Journal has this report.

“Conservatives plan $10 million high court ad campaign”: Burgess Everett of Politico.com has this report.

“How a Blog Post Led to a Supreme Court Argument”: Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

“High Court Argument to Center on Level of Benefits for Spec. Ed.” Christina A. Samuels of Education Week has this report.

“Jeff Sessions Previously Denied Federal Judgeship Amid Racism Controversy”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News has an article headlined “Four Things To Watch For During Jeff Sessions’ Confirmation Hearing.”

And online at Slate, Elizabeth Wydra has a jurisprudence essay titled “Bad Law: A look at the terrible things Jeff Sessions did as attorney general of Alabama.”

“Death to the Gerrymander: How Paul Smith might defeat unconstitutional redistricting once and for all.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Asian-American Group The Slants Head to Supreme Court Over Band Name; Portland rockers bring seven-year Freedom of Speech battle to Washington, D.C. on January 18th”: Daniel Kreps of Rolling Stone has this report.

The article concludes, “While the Slants are in Washington, D.C. for the hearings, they’ll also perform some shows in the nation’s capital, as well as hold a protest rally and afternoon concert outside the Supreme Court following their hearing on January 18th. That night, they’ll play D.C.’s Electric Maid.”

“Supreme Court Seems Wary of Hurdles for Refunds of Fines After Exonerations”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “High court questions why refunds aren’t automatic when a Colo. conviction is overturned.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court weighs the right to a refund for people who paid fines before they were freed.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court justices want Colorado to repay defendants if convictions reversed.”

And at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog,” Jess Bravin has a post titled “Do Reversed Convictions Come With a Money-Back Guarantee?”

“Attorneys asks U.S. Supreme Court to rule on cellphone ban in Saginaw courtrooms”: Bob Johnson of The Saginaw News has this report on a petition for writ of certiorari filed today.

“Jeff Sessions Has a History of Blocking Black Judges”: Pema Levy of Mother Jones has this report.

“Three Recent Law School Graduates Secure Clerkships on the Supreme Court”: Claire Stamler-Goody of the University of Chicago Law School has this report.

“Supreme Court Has Had Enough With Police Suits”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“Trump SCOTUS Short-Lister Gorsuch: Five Things to Know.” Patrick Gregory of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

“Ninth Circuit rejects meaningful ascertainability requirement for class certification, cementing deep circuit split”: Archis A. Parasharami and Daniel Jones have this post at the “Class Defense Blog” of Mayer Brown.

“Big Win For Free Speech Online In Backpage Lawsuit”: Law professor Eric Goldman has this post today at Forbes.com.

“Obama Administration Takes A Last Stand To Protect Transgender Bathroom Rights; The Justice Department has asked a federal appeals court to step in”: Dominic Holden of BuzzFeed News has this report.

“#appellatetwitter: Appellate Law Enthusiasts’ ‘Nerdy’ Forum.” Melissa Stanzione of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

Explore the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Lewis v. Clarke, No. 15-1500: At this link.

Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro to become a SCOTUS repeater? On June 20, 2016, after oral argument exactly two months before, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-to-2 decision remanding this case for further proceedings in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Today. a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit issued this decision on remand. The first paragraph of the “Conclusion” section of today’s Ninth Circuit’s decision begins:

After a thorough, de novo review of congressional intent, we hold that the exemption in sec. 213(b)(10)(A) does not encompass service advisors. We acknowledge that our holding conflicts with published decisions by the Fourth and Fifth Circuits and by the Supreme Court of Montana.

The odds of this case’s becoming a SCOTUS repeater would appear to be very high.

“Justices skeptical over Colo. refusal to refund court fees”: The Associated Press has this report.

Update: You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Nelson v. Colorado, No. 15-1256.

“AP Fact Check: Ruth Bader Ginsburg not resigning over Trump.” The Associated Press has this report.

“Why Trump and the GOP Might not Want to Fill Scalia’s Seat”: Eric Segall has this post today at the “Dorf on Law” blog.

“Why do we still have the filibuster?” Sandy Levinson has this post today at the “Balkinization” blog.

“Judge Posner Responds To His Comments Concerning Hively v. Ivy Tech”: Josh Blackman has this blog post today.

“How Big a Deal Are Four 9th Circuit Vacancies That Await Trump?” Ross Todd of The Recorder has this report.

“Missouri Execution Drug Purchases Revealed: Death row inmates spent years fighting over Missouri’s use of compounded pentobarbital; A sealed court filing obtained by BuzzFeed News says they may have been fighting the wrong thing.” Chris McDaniel of BuzzFeed News has this report.

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court did not grant review in any new cases, but the Court did call for the views of the Solicitor General’s office in four cases. In addition, the Court dismissed the direct appeal in Parrott v. Lamone, No. 16-588, “for want of jurisdiction.”

In White v. Pauly, No. 16-67. the Court issued a unanimous per curiam decision. Justice Ginsburg issued a concurring opinion.

And in early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “High Court won’t hear appeal over Backpage.com escort ads“; “Ventura loses appeal to reinstate $1.8M verdict“; and “Supreme Court rejects appeal from flight-sharing company.”

From Reuters, Lawrence Hurley reports that “Supreme Court rejects Dow over $1 billion tax deduction claim” and “U.S. top court rejects banks over FDIC lawsuit.” And Andrew Chung reports that “U.S. Supreme Court will not examine tech industry legal shield.”

“In the Mold of Scalia or Alito: Recent Criminal and Habeas Decisions of Judges Pryor and Sykes.” Scott Meisler has posted this paper at SSRN.

“The Hazards Justices Face by Owning Individual Stocks”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“OT2016 #10: ‘You Would Wear a Stroller.'” You can access the new episode of the “First Mondays” podcast, featuring Ian Samuel and Dan Epps, via this link.