Who’s the latest federal appellate judge to quote Robert H. Bork’s The Tempting of America? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did it on Monday.

Fifth Circuit Judge James C. Ho — who if he keeps this up is bound to be on the next short list for the U.S. Supreme Court — did it today, writing separately to concur in his own majority opinion for a unanimous three-judge panel.

“The Limits of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Usefulness: A transactional theology.” Noah Rothman has this post at the blog of Commentary magazine.

“Eleventh Circuit Creates Circuit Split on Cell Phone Border Searches; Waiting for Carpenter? This issue may go upstairs next.” Orin Kerr has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

“How Much Longer Can Rod Rosenstein Protect Robert Mueller?” Jeffrey Toobin has this post online at The New Yorker.

“Stegner appointed to Supreme Court; University of Idaho grad set to become only North Idaho justice on state’s highest court”: Kara McMurray has this front page article in today’s edition of The Moscow-Pullman Daily News.

“Kansas Supreme Court expresses doubt about five-year, $525M education package”: Tim Carpenter of The Topeka Capital-Journal has this report.

“State Supreme Court to review landmark case on money bail system”: Bob Egelko and Evan Sernoffsky of The San Francisco Chronicle have this report.

And at the “At the Lectern” blog, David Ettinger has a post titled “Supreme Court will address constitutionality of California’s cash bail system.”

“How the Supreme Court is invoking a 1925 law to restrict workers’ rights today”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“Regardless of How the Supreme Court Rules in ‘Janus,’ Labor Needs to Get More Militant; The teachers in West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Kentucky show us that successful labor action can happen in any environment”: Michelle Chen has this essay online at The Nation.

“Tragedy of Errors: The Solicitor General, the Supreme Court and the Truth.” Regina Jefferies has this blog post at “Just Security.”

“Gay Kentucky man loses bid to challenge GOP clerk Kim Davis”: Adam Beam and Dylan Lovan of The Associated Press have this report.

“Goodson, Sterling in Arkansas Supreme Court runoff”: In today’s edition of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, John Moritz has a front page article that begins, “Targeted by out-of-state attack ads, Supreme Court Justice Courtney Goodson survived an initial round of voting Tuesday and advanced to a November runoff election where she will face David Sterling, the beneficiary of outside spending.”

“Second spot in Kentucky Supreme Court runoff decided by just 51 votes”: Bill Estep of The Lexington Herald-Leader has this report.

“Legal Innocence and Federal Habeas”: Leah Litman has this post at the “Take Care” blog.

“Trump’s stealth victory: Reshaping the courts.” Melissa Quinn of the Washington Examiner has this report.

“Retirement Plan Blues”: At his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog, Adam Feldman has a post that begins, “It is that time of year again. As we near the end of the Supreme Court term, we are experiencing another round of prognostications on whether Justice Kennedy will retire leaving another vacancy for the Trump Administration to fill.”

“A bunch of good Third Circuit oral arguments”: Matthew Stiegler has this post at his “CA3blog.”

Two things people with opinions might wish to opine about before the Memorial Day holiday arrives: 1. As I noted in this earlier post, the Ninth Circuit on Monday issued a news release titled “Ninth Circuit Judicial Council Acts on Workplace Environment Recommendations.” Were it not for conduct attributed to a certain Ninth Circuit judge who has since resigned from judicial service, perhaps the current focus on sexual harassment within the federal judicial branch would not have arisen as it did. The question thus presents itself whether the Ninth Circuit’s just announced response is a good start, completely sufficient for all purposes, not a good start, or hopefully not where things should end up in the long term. Opinions anyone?

2. Also on Monday, as noted in this earlier post, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg managed to make headlines for two entirely different things — delivering a high profile dissenting opinion; and remarks delivered in response to receiving an award at the American Law Institute’s annual meeting. As Politico reported with regard to the second of those two things, “Ginsburg calls for return of ‘bipartisan spirit’ to judicial confirmations.” Now while people of good sense seem to agree that Justice Ginsburg should refrain from offering politically tinged remarks, it is not uncommon for federal judges to bemoan the state of federal judicial confirmations. Nevertheless, at this time, Democrats seem to be on the losing end of the judicial confirmation wars. If the Democrats manage to take control of the U.S. Senate in this November’s elections, does anyone believe that Justice Ginsburg would prefer to have a Democratically controlled Senate decide whether to confirm Anthony M. Kennedy’s successor based solely on the nominee’s judicial qualifications? Justice Ginsburg’s remarks about judicial confirmations this past Monday, while admirable as an absolute matter, seem to have come at exactly the wrong time for her partisan supporters. If I am correct, why hasn’t anyone had anything to say about this yet?

“Court to Provide Live Audio Streaming of All Arguments at Start of 2018-2019 Term”: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today issued a news release that begins, “Chief Judge Garland announced today that the Court has voted to live stream audio of all oral arguments, except when classified or sealed matters must be discussed.”

Once this begins, the D.C. Circuit will join the Ninth Circuit — which currently is the only federal appellate court to livestream its oral arguments on YouTube. If I am reading the D.C. Circuit’s local rules correctly, that court’s 2018-2019 term will begin in September 2018.