“Texas Supreme Court not lacking for input on gay marriage case”: Chuck Lindell of The Austin American-Statesman has an article that begins, “As its judges prepare to hear arguments on efforts to limit the federal ruling allowing gay marriage, the Texas Supreme Court has received a flurry of unsolicited advice from politicians, legal scholars, religious groups and activists.”
The Supreme Court of Texas will hear oral argument in the case tomorrow, and you can view the oral argument live, online via this link once it gets underway. And you can access the briefs and other documents filed in the case via this link.
“Department of Justification: Stephen Bannon and Jeff Sessions, the new attorney general, have long shared a vision for remaking America. Now the nation’s top law-enforcement agency can serve as a tool for enacting it.” Emily Bazelon will have this article in the March 5, 2017 issue of The New York Times Magazine.
“Barring Reporters From Briefings: Does It Cross a Legal Line?” Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
“United States v. Dylann Roof”: Edward Ball has this article, the first of two parts, in the March 9, 2017 issue of The New York Review of Books.
“Judicial originalism as myth”: Law professor Eric J. Segall has this post at Vox.com.
“What Press Freedom Means When You Can Just Press ‘Tweet'”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.
“New Trump travel order will aim to short circuit legal challenges”: Dan Levine and Mica Rosenberg of Reuters have a report that begins, “In formulating a new executive order limiting travel to the United States, President Donald Trump has promised to make the directive harder to fight successfully in court than the one he issued in January.”
“Justice Ginsburg Planning to Skip Trump’s Speech to Congress”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.
Programming note: This afternoon, I will be out of the office meeting with co-counsel in a pending appeal on which I am working. As a result, additional posts will not appear here until this evening.
As always while I am away from my office, additional appellate-related retweets may appear on this blog’s Twitter feed.
“Trump immigration ban fight could be on two fronts”: Lyle Denniston has this post at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.
Online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has a jurisprudence essay titled “Schrodinger’s Immigration Ban: The Trump administration’s nonsensical claim that its executive order both does and does not exist.”
And online at The Atlantic, law professor Garrett Epps has an essay titled “Papers, Please: Passengers on a domestic flight deplaning in New York were asked to present ID by Customs and Border Protection agents — a likely unenforceable demand that nevertheless diminishes freedom.”
“Court sides with gun blogger who posted officials’ contact info”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has an article that begins, “In a victory for gun advocates, a federal judge said Monday that California appears to have violated freedom of speech with a law allowing public officials — including legislators who voted for gun-control laws — to prevent online posting of their addresses and phone numbers.”
And Don Thompson of The Associated Press reports that “Judge blocks California law protecting officials’ privacy.”
“Federal appeals court rejects egg-labeling lawsuit”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.
“Conviction upheld for Robel Phillipos, friend of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev”: Milton J. Valencia of The Boston Globe has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “Boston Marathon bomber’s friend’s sentence upheld.”
My earlier coverage of last Friday’s First Circuit ruling can be accessed here.
“Judge John Kane on Supreme Court Nominee, 10th Circuit Judge Neil Gorsuch”: The “Fault Lines” blog of Mimesis Law has today posted this statement from Senior U.S. District Judge John L. Kane (D. Colo.).
