“If Justice Kennedy thought Colorado was ‘neither tolerant nor respectful’ of a baker’s religious beliefs, how will he feel about California’s attack on pro-life pregnancy centers?” John Bursch has this guest post at “SCOTUSblog.”

Pawn-related television shows are apparently very popular; pawn-related federal appellate court opinions perhaps not so much? Although yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit may change that, given its knock-down, drag-out battle between the majority and dissenting opinions.

“Senate poised to confirm Trump judicial nominee labeled ‘not qualified'”: Jordain Carney of The Hill has this report.

“A Short Take On A Coincidence”: Senior U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf (D. Neb.) has this post at the “Simple Justice” blog.

Also at that blog, Scott H. Greenfield has posts titled “Stupid Lawyer Tricks, Kozinski Edition” and “Judge Alex Kozinski and The Mad Cow.”

“The Kozinski sexual-misconduct allegations and the Third Circuit”: Matthew Stiegler has this post at his “CA3blog.”

“Supreme Court turns down case that raised issue of LGBT worker protections”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court puts off hearing a case on job protections for LGBT employees.”

“Suspect Evidence Informed a Momentous Supreme Court Decision on Criminal Sentencing; The U.S. Sentencing Commission helped send more people to prison for longer terms; It’s a shame it was created to address a nonexistent crisis; Here’s how the Supreme Court got misled”: Ryan Gabrielson of ProPublica has this report.

“California’s chief justice has had her own #MeToo moments”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“More Women Acknowledge Judge Kozinski’s Behavior Was An ‘Open Secret’; This is what happens when you dare women to tell their stories”: Kathryn Rubino has this post at “Above the Law.”

Online at “The Cut,” Rebecca Traister has an essay titled “This Moment Isn’t (Just) About Sex. It’s Really About Work.”

Online at The Washington Post, columnist Petula Dvorak has an essay titled “How many men are harassers or predators?”

And if you think reporting on the matter sounds creepy in English, consider how it sounds in Filipino, as Abante of Manila reports that “US judge inireklamo, staff pinaghuhubad, pinapanood ng porn video.”

“Don’t be fooled: New SCOTUS grant in China Agritech isn’t about securities litigation.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“Is the Judiciary Ready to Handle Harassment Charges?” Cristian Farias has this post at the “Daily Intelligencer” blog of New York magazine.

“Is the Supreme Court finally ready to tackle partisan gerrymandering? Signs suggest yes.” Law professor Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this essay online at The Los Angeles Times.

“Ghost of Justice Scalia looms as Supreme Court debates religion and civil rights law”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“Clerkships Are, Or Can Be, Just Jobs. Maybe it’s Better That Way.” Paul Horwitz has this post at “PrawfsBlawg.” Although that blog generally allows comments, the comments to this particular post are closed for whatever reason.

“Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Bias Against Gay Workers”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court won’t hear LGBT job discrimination case.”

Greg Stohr of Bloombeg News reports that “U.S. Supreme Court Turns Away Sexual-Orientation Bias Case.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. high court turns away dispute over gay worker protections.”

And Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News reports that “Justices Pass On Deciding If Anti-Gay Workplace Discrimination Is Banned Under Current Law.”

See Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski in action, live at 1 p.m. eastern time on YouTube: In today’s edition of The New York Times, Jacey Fortin has an article headlined “Federal Appeals Court Judge Is Accused of Sexual Harassment.” Of course, The Washington Post broke this news Friday evening in an article that appeared on the newspaper’s front page, above-the-fold, in its Saturday print edition.

For all that one might say about this brash, outspoken, and incredibly talented jurist, he did have the highly praiseworthy idea to begin live-broadcasting the Ninth Circuit’s oral arguments on YouTube. Today at 10 a.m. pacific time, 1 p.m. eastern time, Judge Kozinski is scheduled to participate on a three-judge panel that will hear oral argument in San Francisco in a potentially significant environmental case. Ninth Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon will also be on the panel, although due to seniority rules, she won’t have to sit next to Judge Kozinski. Natasha Geiling of ThinkProgress previews the oral argument in an article headlined “Here’s what’s at stake for the 21 kids suing the Trump administration over climate change; Arguments before the Ninth Circuit will decide whether the case goes to trial.”

In any event, those wishing to tune-in to see how Judge Kozinski has weathered what may have been a difficult weekend can view the oral argument beginning at 1 p.m. eastern time live on YouTube via this link.

You can follow “How Appealing” on Twitter: Every new post that appears here also appears as a new tweet on this blog’s Twitter feed. And thanks to Twitter’s expansion of the maximum tweet size from 140 to 280 characters, tweets of this blog’s longer posts now contain more information.

Plus, as an added bonus, early in the morning, late at night, and other times when I am away from the computer, this blog’s Twitter feed often will feature appellate-related retweets that haven’t yet been posted to this blog and may never be posted to this blog. To be sure, following this blog on Twitter is far from a perfect substitute for visiting this blog directly, but it is a good way to be notified of new posts promptly.

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court today did not grant review in any new cases.

“Court refuses to reinstate netting lawsuit against Major League Baseball”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this report on a non-precedential ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued on Friday.

“Probing the Mueller Probe, and Inside the Chamber for Masterpiece Cakeshop: The (legal) highs and lows of the Russia investigation, and oral arguments in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.” Slate has posted online this new installment of its “Amicus” podcast featuring Dahlia Lithwick.

“OT2017 #9: ‘Peak SG.'” You can access today’s new installment of the “First Mondays” podcast, featuring Ian Samuel and Dan Epps, via this link.

“Mostly White and Male: Diversity Still Lags Among SCOTUS Law Clerks; Research conducted by The National Law Journal found 85 percent of all law clerks since 2005 have been white and twice as many men as women gain entry.” Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

“Justices, Divided 5-4, Let Trump Shield DACA Documents”: Adam Liptak had this article in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times.

In Saturday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes had an article headlined “Supreme Court says administration for now need not turn over more DACA documents.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court blocks order for White House to disclose DACA documents.”

Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Says White House Can Withhold DACA Documents for Now; In a 5-4 vote, the court temporarily halted the release of Trump administration documents related to the program’s cancellation.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court says Trump administration can withhold DACA docs for now.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court blocks release of Trump ‘Dreamer’ immigrant documents.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Shields Trump Administration on ‘Dreamer’ Documents.”

And Josh Gerstein of Politico.com reports that “Supreme Court lifts orders to disclose DACA cancellation records; The justices split, 5-4, in dispute over Trump’s decision to end protections for ‘Dreamers.’”

You can access Friday evening’s 5-to-4 order of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s dissent therefrom, at this link.

“U.S. Appeals Court upholds conviction of Brendan Dassey in ‘Making a Murderer’ case”: Bruce Vielmetti and Tom Kertscher of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel have this report.

And in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times, Daniel Victor had an article headlined “Court Rules Against Brendan Dassey, Subject of ‘Making a Murderer.’”

You can access Friday’s 4-to-3 ruling of the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit at this link.

“D.C. Circuit Review — Reviewed: Thoughts from Judge Randolph.” Aaron Nielson has this post at the “Notice & Comment” blog of the Yale Journal on Regulation.

“State Supreme Court runs up quite a tab”: Columnist Phil Kabler has this essay online at The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette-Mail.

“In Gay Wedding Cake Case, Equal Rights at Stake”: Kenneth Jost has this post at his blog, “Jost on Justice.”

“The Supreme Court’s privacy case shows Congress needs to draw new lines”: The Washington Post has published this editorial.

“The Baker and the Empire”: Columnist Ross Douthat has this op-ed in today’s edition of The New York Times.

List of federal appellate judges who clerked for Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski (by order of entry into judicial service, with the earliest listed first): D.C. Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh; Ninth Circuit Judge Sandra S. Ikuta; Ninth Circuit Judge Paul J. Watford; and Third Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause.

List of widely read law blogs founded by Kozinski clerks having a contributor who retweeted the main accuser’s personal account: “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

List of U.S. Supreme Court-focused podcasts having one co-host who clerked for Judge Kozinski and the other co-host who questioned Judge Kozinski’s post-accusation conduct: “First Mondays.”

Elsewhere, Matthew Stiegler — author of the “CA3blog” — has two must-read Twitter threads, here and here, about the earlier judicial misconduct proceedings against Judge Kozinski.

“Republicans step up defense of ‘not qualified’ judicial nominees; GOP senators are ratcheting up their attacks on the American Bar Association, which has emerged as a stumbling block in President Donald Trump’s effort to transform the courts”: Seung Min Kim and John Bresnahan of Politico.com have this report.

“Decisions, Decisions”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“There are likely several more stories to come.” Law professor Nancy Rapoport has a blog post that begins, “Courtney Milan’s post about Alex Kozinski is a harrowing read, but an important one.”

“Justices to Hear Second Partisan Gerrymandering Case”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court will take up a second gerrymandering case this term.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court to hear second case challenging election districts.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Widens Review of Gerrymandering; Justices agree to add a Republican challenge to redistricting in Maryland to an earlier Wisconsin case brought by Democrats.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court takes up second partisan gerrymandering case this term.”

John Fritze of The Baltimore Sun reports that “Supreme Court agrees to hear Maryland redistricting case.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court takes up Republican challenge to Maryland electoral district.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Partisan Gerrymandering Fight Expanded by U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Trudeau nominated a woman for Canada’s Supreme Court. Some progressives are disappointed.” Alan Freeman of The Washington Post has this news analysis.