“Why this BYU law professor is headed to the Supreme Court”: Kelsey Dallas of Deseret News has this report.

And Joe Hadfield of BYU News reports that “BYU Law’s pipeline to the U.S. Supreme Court continues.”

Congratulations to my friend Senior Ninth Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith for becoming a #SCOTUS feeder judge.

“Federal judge backs notion of ‘Trump judges,’ rules against Mark Janus after Supreme Court win”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

“‘The Chief’: John Roberts’ journey from ‘sober puss’ to the pinnacle of American law.” Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.

“Limiting Agency Power, a Goal of the Right, Gets Supreme Court Test”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “In veteran’s disability case, Supreme Court considers junking longtime deference to federal agencies.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court appears wary of taking on federal agencies over regulations.”

Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “High court seems split over curbing federal agencies’ power.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court leans toward limiting federal agency power.”

Greg Stohr and Jennifer A Dlouhy of Bloomberg News report that “Supreme Court Considers Reducing Regulatory Agency Power.”

Lydia Wheeler of The Hill reports that “Justices weigh agency rulemaking power.”

Ellen M. Gilmer of Greenwire has an article headlined “Deference rule: Good sense or bureaucratic ‘sideswipe’?”

In commentary, today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial titled “The Court vs. the Regulatory State: The Justices can restore their power to check bureaucratic excess.”

And online at ThinkProgress, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “Supreme Court justice warns of the ‘greatest judicial power grab since Marbury v. Madison’; The Supreme Court looks eager to seize power, now that it is dominated by Bush and Trump appointees.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Kisor v. Wilkie, No. 18-15.

“Supreme Court Sides With SEC in Broker False Statements Case; Court rules brokers can be liable for sending fraudulent investment pitches, even if they didn’t write them”: Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court backs SEC, safeguards investor-protection laws.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Buttresses SEC’s Power, Rules Against Banker.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Lorenzo v. SEC, No. 17-1077, at this link.

“Grindr defeats appeal over harassment on gay dating app”: Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report.

And Adam Klasfeld of Courthouse News Service reports that “Grindr Suit Quashed but Big Tech Controversy Endures.”

You can access today’s unpublished, non-precedential ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

“Why Is Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Hot Again?” Michael C. Dorf has this blog post at “Dorf on Law.”

“Here’s the Fun You Missed Outside Tuesday’s Supreme Court Redistricting Hearing”: Bruce DePuyt of Maryland Matters has this report.

One lesson to be learned from the article is that one should not stand in the way of NPR’s Nina Totenberg during post-oral argument statements on the steps in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, as anyone who has regularly viewed such post-argument segments on C-SPAN would already know well.

“These two arguments make Americans less opposed to court packing; Putting more justices on the Supreme Court might not backfire as spectacularly as many expect”: Professors Amanda Driscoll and Michael J. Nelson have this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Pushing for ‘heartbeat’ abortion bills, more states try to force Supreme Court to revisit Roe”: Rachana Pradhan of Politico has this report.

“Trump’s latest attack on Obamacare damages the Justice Department”: Law professor Josh Blackman has this essay online at The Washington Post.