“D.C. Circuit Review — Reviewed: The Irons Footnote.” Aaron Nielson has this post at the “Notice & Comment” blog of the Yale Journal on Regulation.

“Trump’s New Plan to Dismantle Obamacare Comes With Political Risks”: Abby Goodnough, Robert Pear, and Charlie Savage of The New York Times have this report.

“No, Obama Did Not Do It First: The Trump DOJ’s baseless justification for refusing to defend the Affordable Care Act has no precedent.” Law professor Daniel Hemel has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Access the June 2018 issue of the Harvard Law Review: Via this link. The issue contains a tribute titled “In Memoriam: Judge Stephen Reinhardt” and the article “Harmless Errors and Substantial Rights” by law professor Daniel Epps. In addition, the issue contains a Note titled “The Presumption of Regularity in Judicial Review of the Executive Branch.”

“Presidential Pardons Are Reviewable by the Courts; The Supreme Court could look at a Trump self-pardon”: Attorney Neil Lloyd has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Sen. Sherrod Brown says he will not support Trump’s nominees for Ohio-based appeals court”: Eric Heisig of The Cleveland Plain Dealer has this report.

Today, U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) issued a news release titled “Brown Will Not Support Judge Nominees Who Worked To Strip Ohioans of Their Rights.”

“Supreme Court Ethics Committee Issues Guidance to Judges who give Educational Presentations to Specialty Bar Associations”: The California Courts Newsroom of the Judicial Council of California has issued this news release. You can access the formal Judicial Ethics Opinion at this link.

“Fla. Supreme Court Tries To Sort Out Facebook Friends”: Jim Saunders of the News Service of Florida has a report that begins, “In a dispute about whether a Miami-Dade County judge should be disqualified from a case, Florida Supreme Court justices grappled Thursday with a basic, but seemingly complicated, question: Are Facebook friends different from other types of friends?”

Mike Vasilinda of Florida’s Capitol News Service has a report headlined “Can lawyers and judges involved in the same case be Facebook friends?”

And Michael Moline of Florida Politics reports that “Supreme Court hears arguments over judge’s Facebook friendship with attorney.”

“The Supreme Court Let Me Live My Faith Again; The justices affirmed that I don’t have to violate my beliefs to work as a cake artist”: Jack Phillips has this essay online at The Wall Street Journal.

“Justice Department Urges Court To Declare ACA’s Individual Mandate Unconstitutional; As a result, protections for pre-existing conditions and other limits on premiums should be struck down as well, DOJ argues”: Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News has this report.

Today is #AppellateTwitter day, and to commemorate it several appellate judges are answering questions posed to them on Twitter: Today is the two-year anniversary of the creation of the hashtag #Appellatetwitter. At some later point, the “T” in the hashtag’s second word began to appear as capitalized.

Becoming a member of #AppellateTwitter is easy. There is no test. You don’t have to beat a #SCOTUS superstar in an appeal decided by your regional federal appellate court. Rather, just join Twitter, which perhaps you have already done, and begin using and following the hashtag. And if you are already on Twitter or decide to join, you can also follow this blog’s Twitter feed.

“Just How Indefensible Does an Argument in a Government Brief Have to Be to Cause All the Career Litigators in Federal Programs to Withdraw from the Case?” Marty Lederman has this post at the “Balkinization” blog.

“How Birth Certificates Are Being Weaponized Once Again: A century ago, birth certificates were used to segregate the South; Today, they’re being used to impose binary identities on transgender people.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“Travel Ban, Gerrymandering to Top High Court’s Closing Flourish”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.