“Easy Reading (By Supreme Court Standards)”: Adam Feldman has this interesting post today at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“Scotus review of Third Circuit case sought to resolve circuit split over who can challenge rental-car searches”: Matthew Stiegler has this post today at his “CA3blog.”

15 years of “How Appealing” — reader mail: Today’s email is from attorney and longtime reader Elias Batchelder:

I started reading your blog in 2003, my first year of law school. Without ever meeting me, you nurtured my own interest in appellate law, which I have been practicing now for a decade. It is a somewhat secluded niche of practice — one which greatly benefits from keeping abreast of recent developments in diverse, unrelated fields (and one in which an legal geek couped up in an office can always savor a humorous take on the daily legal developments). My practice focuses exclusively on death penalty appeals, and since I have cited and forwarded cases I found through your posts on numerous occasions, you might take credit not only for keeping me and all your readers entertained all these years, but also for helping to save a life. Thanks for all of your hard work and best of luck going forward.

Elias, thanks so very much for that wonderful email! The possibility that “How Appealing” has helped to save someone’s life is not something that had occurred to me previously. I will post another reader email tomorrow.

“Appeals court wrestles with Trump’s revised travel ban order; Judges mull administration’s request to revise directive blasted as ‘Muslim ban'”: Josh Gerstein of Politico.com has this report.

On rare occasion, the criminal defendant-appellant will supply his own humorous movie reference: In 2016, Stacey Barchenger of The Tennessean had articles headlined “Franklin man guilty in Mitt Romney tax fraud scheme” and “Mitt Romney tax hoax lands Franklin man 4-year prison term.”

Today, on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton issued this opinion affirming the defendant’s conviction and vacating the defendant’s sentence.

“Unity Was Emerging on Sentencing. Then Came Jeff Sessions.” Carl Hulse has this new installment of his “On Washington” column in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“When Does Political Gerrymandering Cross a Constitutional Line?” Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“State of Hawaii, et al. v. Trump: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reviews the decision of Hawaii U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson regarding the enforcement of President Trump’s travel ban.” C-SPAN provides live coverage starting now via this link. Or view live online via the Ninth Circuit’s own YouTube feed.

Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court today issued rulings in three argued cases.

1. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Kindred Nursing Centers Ltd. v. Clark, No. 16-32. Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Stephen G. Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court in Howell v. Howell, No. 15-1031. Justice Thomas issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. And Justice Breyer also delivered the opinion of the Court in Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, No. 16-348. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

“What Makes a Parent? A brutal custody battle between two women raises questions about who has a right to rear a child — and could redefine the legal meaning of family.” Ian Parker has this article in the May 22, 2017 issue of The New Yorker.

“The federal appeals court that Trump hates the most will now hear arguments on his travel ban”: Matt Zapotosky has this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

Josh Gerstein of Politico.com reports that “Mosque snooping suit could impact Trump travel ban case.”

And on Twitter, Neal Katyal — who will argue today’s appeal in the Ninth Circuit on behalf of Hawaii — offers these thoughts.

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 Acting Solicitor General in two cases.

And in North Carolina v. North Carolina State Conf. of the NAACP, No. 16-833, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. issued a statement respecting the denial of certiorari.

“Firing Comey Was a Grave Abuse of Power: In 1974, Republicans put country before Party and told Nixon it was time to go; Today’s G.O.P. seems unlikely to live up to its predecessor’s example.” Jeffrey Toobin has this Comment in the Talk of the Town section of the May 22, 2017 issue of The New Yorker.

“Lawyerly Integrity in the Trump Administration”: Jack Goldsmith has this post at the “Lawfare” blog.

One week from today — “Twin Peaks” returns: From time to time (see here and here, both focusing on this snippet of dialogue, for example) this blog has alluded to “Twin Peaks,” so I thought I’d note that the show returns to television with new episodes beginning next Sunday.

Recently, in a happy coincidence, Harry Goaz — the actor who plays sheriff’s deputy Andy Brennan on the show — began following “How Appealing” on Twitter.

“What’s Next for Comey? Probably Not ‘a Normal Job.'” Matthew Goldstein and Alexandra Stevenson have this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In addition, in the Sunday Review section of that newspaper, Benjamin Wittes today has an essay titled “What We’re Losing in James Comey.”

15 years of “How Appealing” — reader mail: Today’s email (with hyperlinks, no less) is from law professor Rick Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog“:

Congratulations on 15 fabulous years of How Appealing, which is one of only two blogs I check every morning before doing anything else. Your work is indispensable, as is your fine sense of humor.

On the tenth anniversary of my own Election Law Blog, I called you my “blogfather,” because you were my inspiration for blogging. Indeed, here’s what I told then-law student (now professor) Will Baude in his 2003 20 questions interview with me (itself an homage to your own 20 questions for appellate judges) about why I started blogging:

Back in January, I was talking about The Senate’s filibuster of judges with my Loyola Law School colleague, Kurt Lash. He told me I should check out the How Appealing blog. “What’s a blog?, I asked. A month later I was blogging, realizing that there was a need for coverage of election law in the way that Howard Bashman covers appellate law. What is so wonderful about Howard is that he is comprehensive and fair. Although he has definite opinions, he never uses his blog to stifle or distort others’ points of view. To the contrary, it is a forum for exploring many different ideas. I have tried to emulate the “fair and balanced” Bashman (I hope he won’t get sued by Fox now!).

Don’t ever change, Howard! Please don’t hang it up, and remain “fair and balanced.” We need you.

Thanks so very much for your kind words, Rick! Helping to inspire the creation of your blog and also “SCOTUSblog” are two of the most wonderful things that have resulted from operating this blog. It has also been a pleasure getting to know you and linking to your writings and blog posts over the years. I will post another reader email tomorrow.

“Greg Abbott plays an outsized role in filling U.S. judicial vacancies”: Maria Recio of The Austin American-Statesman has this report.

“Animus Amicus: A group of law professors tells a federal court that religious bias lies at the heart of Trump’s travel ban.” Slate has posted online this new installment of its “Amicus” podcast featuring Dahlia Lithwick.

“D.C. Circuit Review — Reviewed: A Small Thought About the Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit.” Aaron Nielson has this post at the “Notice & Comment” blog of the Yale Journal on Regulation.

“15 Idaho Attorneys And Judges Vying For Seat On State Supreme Court”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Gamecock Club gets final victory in lawsuit over football fans’ prized parking spaces”: John Monk of The State of Columbia, South Carolina has this article reporting on a ruling that the Supreme Court of South Carolina issued on Thursday.

“Indiana Supreme Court to be all white for first time since 1999”: Madeline Buckley of The Indianapolis Star has an article that begins, “The Indiana Supreme Court is poised to have an all-white court for the first time since 1999, raising concern in Indiana’s minority community and questions about whether the state’s legal system does enough to foster a pipeline of diverse lawyers and judges.”

“Blankenship plans US Supreme Court appeal”: Ken Ward Jr. of The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette-Mail has this report.

“Do evangelicals lack ‘intellectual heft’ for the Supreme Court?” Richard Mouw has this essay online at Religion News Service.

15 years of “How Appealing” — reader mail: Today’s email is from attorney and longtime reader Alan R. Kabat:

Amazing — you’ve persevered in providing a balanced feed of interesting items, and am sure I’m not the only one who appreciates your even-handed blogging.

The one thing from your blog that obviously most sticks in my mind is the Second Circuit’s Higazy v. Templeton decision — had not realized that was 10 years ago (time flies). If the CA2 had left everything alone and pretended that nothing happened, the decision would probably have only created a few waves in limited circles for its disclosures, but the attempt to recall the decision ended up generating far more public interest and media coverage of what was redacted.

Thanks, Alan, for that kind email and for bringing various items to my attention over the years for possible mention on the blog. Also, thanks for remembering the Higazy matter (see here and here for the details), which certainly did garner some attention at the time. I will post another reader email tomorrow.

“Why it would be bad for Trump to break up the 9th Circuit Court”: Ian Samuel and Brian Goldman have this essay online at The San Jose Mercury News.

“Appeal in boy’s burp arrest case relies on Gorsuch dissent”: Sam Hananel of The Associated Press has this report.

“Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison Eid in line for Neil Gorsuch’s seat on 10th Circuit; Move would fit Trump’s early pattern of judicial appointments”: Mark K. Matthews has this front page article in today’s edition of The Denver Post.

“Will Supreme Court rescue Trump’s immigration travel ban?” Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Extra Scrutiny: The ‘Breyer Pages.'” Joe Dunman recently launched a U.S. Supreme Court-related podcast titled “Heightened Scrutiny.”

Today’s episode contains nearly 10 minutes of really long questions from Justice Stephen G. Breyer. How many of Justice Breyer’s never-ending questions can fit into 10 minutes? Listen to find out.

15 years of “How Appealing” — reader mail: Today’s email is from Lawrence Hurley, who covers the U.S. Supreme Court (and sometimes also the U.S. Courts of Appeals) for Reuters:

Howard — Congrats on the great run.

I just wanted to mention again that I have found your blog useful in two very different ways. It is of course an indispensable news aggregator for all of those covering legal news and is a great way to keep up on everything.

Separately, I’m still grateful on a personal level for when you posted my stories on your blog back when I worked for the LA Daily Journal as a lonely Washington correspondent. As the Daily Journal had a high paywall and little presence in DC, How Appealing was one of the few ways my stories could reach people outside of California, which was most helpful as I sought to establish myself as a legal reporter.

Lawrence, thanks so very much for those kind words! I can’t believe we have yet to meet in person, but hopefully before too much longer. It was my pleasure to be able to provide access to your work and the work of Brent Kendall during your tenures at The Daily Journal. I have no doubt that you and Brent would have achieved all of your successes even without me, but I’m glad to have been of help. I will post another reader email tomorrow.

“Supreme Court Standing Law Continues to Befuddle Courts”: Perry Cooper of Bloomberg BNA has this report.

“Grassley Signals Deference to White House on Circuit Judges; Blue slips on district judges might carry more weight than appellate picks”: Niels Lesniewski of Roll Call has this report.

“Anti-Gay Attacks Not Covered by West Virginia Hate Crime Law, Court Rules”: Liam Stack of The New York Times has this report.

My earlier coverage of Tuesday’s ruling (plus access the dissenting opinion here) can be accessed at this link.