“Raleigh circuit judge appointed to state Supreme Court”: Lacie Pierson of The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette-Mail has an article that begins, “Raleigh County Circuit Judge John Hutchison has been appointed to a temporary position on the West Virginia Supreme Court.”

“Justice Department asks Supreme Court to let transgender military ban take effect”: Ariane de Vogue and Devan Cole of CNN have this report.

And Lydia Wheeler of The Hill reports that “Trump administration asks Supreme Court to temporarily allow transgender military ban.”

“Chief justice of the California Supreme Court leaves the Republican Party, citing Kavanaugh”: Dan Morain has this post at CALmatters.

And Morgan Gstalter of The Hill reports that “Chief Justice of California Supreme Court leaves GOP over Kavanaugh confirmation.”

“The Supreme Court confirmation process is actually less political than it once was; Our fights over nominees might be bitter, but they’re still less contentious than in the 19th century”: Timothy S. Huebner has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Ruling: Private schools can get taxpayer funded textbooks.” Shelby Perea of The Albuquerque Journal has this report on a 3-to-2 ruling that the Supreme Court of New Mexico issued today.

Seventh Circuit Chief Judge Diane P. Wood explains the civic virtue of holding oral argument of cases to be decided on appeal: This morning, the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia hosted an event titled “Judicial Independence and the Federal Courts: A Historical Perspective.” You can view the entire event on YouTube via this link.

Chief Judge Diane P. Wood of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit was the lone federal appellate judge among the speakers assembled for the three-panel program, and Chief Judge Wood’s panel was titled “Judicial Independence and the Federal Courts in the 21st Century.”

In answer to a question about how the federal judiciary can continue to earn the public’s trust in the future, Chief Judge Wood began by saying that courts should perform as much of their work in public as possible, including having oral argument in cases that are pending for decision so that the public and the litigants can know that the judges themselves engaged with the arguments of the parties. To its great credit, the Seventh Circuit remains one of the few federal appellate courts where a large number of appeals continue to receive oral argument. You can view this specific question and answer segment on YouTube via this link.

“Court Shorts: Separation of Powers.” United States Courts has posted this video on YouTube.

“Chevron as Construction”: Law professors Lawrence B. Solum and Cass R. Sunstein have posted this paper on SSRN (via “Legal Theory Blog“).

“Behind the Supreme Court’s Dodge: Three Justices rebuke Kavanaugh and Roberts for ducking a big case.” This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Let’s Think About Court-Packing: Yes, it’s a dangerous tactic; But so is permitting a reality in which Republicans win rigged elections and the Supreme Court winks.” Ian Millhiser has this article in the Winter 2019 issue of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas.

Fifth Circuit potential rehearing en banc alert: Yesterday, a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued this ruling, which would seem to have a much better than average prospect of rehearing en banc should the federal government seek that remedy.

“The Heightened Importance of the Federal Circuit”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“State Courts Become Battleground Over Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Policy”: Christina Goldbaum has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

On a related note, yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued this ruling in a rather unusual case involving Texas’ own sanctuary cities law.

Work-around to access new opinions via the First Circuit’s web site: Free, same-day access to the opinions of federal appellate courts is one of the most useful features that those courts’ web sites offer. Unfortunately, for the past week or two, the new opinions page on the First Circuit’s web site has lost its contents and (as a result) its functionality. This page is the page one arrives at after clicking on the opinions link from center of the First Circuit’s home page.

Until someone at the First Circuit reads this post and corrects the issue (which, if past performance is any guide, could happen very quickly), the way one can still access new opinions is to hover your cursor over the “Opinions & Oral Argument” link across the top of the page and then by clicking on the “Opinion Search” link. The result will provide access to what used to appear on the new opinions page of the First Circuit’s web site. And clicking on the link for “Recent Opinions” will provide access to the First Circuit’s newest opinions.

Update at 4:10 p.m. eastern time: I just received a phone call from the First Circuit’s Clerk’s Office informing me that the issue discussed above has now been fixed.

“How Determinate is the Original Understanding of Stare Decisis?” Michael C. Dorf has this post at his blog, “Dorf on Law.”

And online at Justia’s Verdict, Dorf has a related essay titled “Double Jeopardy Case in Supreme Court is About More than Trump.”

“You Should Have the Right to Sue Apple; In Apple v. Pepper, the Supreme Court will decide whether iPhone App Store customers are entitled to make their case against the tech giant.” FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Clinic Wins Rare Double Appeal; Burchard, Lineberry Help Ensure Sentencing Is Fair for Client”: Eric Williamson of the University of Virginia School of Law has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued yesterday.

You can access the audio of the oral argument of this appeal at this link.

“Broad review of partisan gerrymandering urged”: Lyle Denniston has this post at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Jerry Brown, Save the 740 People on Your Death Row; Six former governors call on California’s governor to follow in their footsteps and grant clemency to death row prisoners”: Richard Celeste, John Kitzhaber, Martin O’Malley, Bill Richardson, Pat Quinn, and Toney Anaya have this essay online at The New York Times.