“The Jurisdictional Problem in the ACA case: A new amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit.” Samuel Bray has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about an amicus brief filed today in which he joined.

“Time to Stop the Democrats’ Obstruction: Enough with the partisan delays; The president’s nominees deserve consideration.” U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has this essay online at Politico Magazine.

In response, Aaron Blake of The Washington Post has an entry at “The Fix” blog titled “Mitch McConnell’s never-ending quest to make Merrick Garland sick to his stomach.”

“Paul Manafort’s Judge Won’t Face Disciplinary Action For How He Treated Mueller’s Office”: Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News has this report.

“A court found Boise’s homeless camping law unconstitutional. Here’s what just happened.” John Sowell of The Idaho Statesman has an article that begins, “A federal appeals court says it won’t reconsider its ruling on Boise’s ‘anti-camping’ ordinance banning sleeping outdoors.”

Margaret Carmel of The Idaho Press reports that “Appeals court sends challenge of Boise’s anti-camping ordinance back to district court.”

Kevin Valine of The Modesto Bee reports that “Ruling protecting homeless who sleep in parks when they don’t have options remains.”

And Sarah Ruiz-Grossman of HuffPost reports that “Cities Can’t Punish Homeless People For Sleeping On Street, Court Affirms.”

You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the opinions concurring in and dissenting from that order, at this link.

“The two sides are growing further apart on abortion. We can thank Donald Trump. Why states are adopting more extreme abortion policies.” Law professor Mary Ziegler has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Supreme Court Rejects Ailing Killer’s Claim That Lethal Injection Will Be Too Painful; Conservative majority warns against ‘unjustified’ delays in executions”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

And in commentary, online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Just Legalized Torture; In an appalling death penalty opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch just overturned 60 years of precedent.”

“Ep. 4: Not a Pedestal, But a Cage.” You can access the new installment of “The Ginsburg Tapes” podcast with Lauren Moxley via this link.

“2 Republican AGs urge court to throw out Obamacare ruling”: Paul Demko of Politico has an article that begins, “Republican attorneys general in Ohio and Montana are opposing a federal judge’s ruling that the entire Affordable Care Act should be thrown out, breaking with the Trump administration’s recent decision to support the ruling.”

“Whitehouse’s Blacklist: Why Does Senator Whitehouse Keep Lying About Neomi Rao?” Adam J. White has this post at Medium.

White’s post responds to a post that U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) had at Medium last Wednesday titled “The Third Federalist Society: Within the Federalist Society, is an operation funded by dark money and designed to remake our judiciary on behalf of a distinct group of very wealthy anonymous funders.”

In the April 8, 2019 issue of The New Yorker: Adam Gopnik has “A Critic at Large” essay titled “How the South Won the Civil War: During Reconstruction, true citizenship finally seemed in reach for black Americans; Then their dreams were dismantled.”

And Louis Menand — who as regular readers of this blog may have gathered is perhaps my favorite New Yorker writer — has a “Books” essay titled “What Baseball Teaches Us About Measuring Talent: The clash between data and intuition opens onto a larger debate.”

“How FDR’s Court-Packing Plan Set Progressive Policies Back by 25 Years”: Rick Pildes has this post at the “Balkinization” blog.

“U.S. appeals court refuses to block ‘bump stocks’ gun ban”: Jan Wolfe of Reuters has this report on a per curiam ruling that a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.

“Kill the electoral college? Stack the Supreme Court?” Chelsea Janes of The Washington Post has this report.

“Rancor and Raw Emotion Surface in Supreme Court Death Penalty Ruling”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Divided Supreme Court rules against death row inmate with rare condition.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court says the Constitution does not ensure a ‘painless’ execution.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court refuses to block Missouri inmate’s execution despite rare medical condition.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court rules Missouri man can be executed despite medical condition.”

Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “Justices rule against Missouri inmate with rare health issue.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Death row inmates not guaranteed a ‘painless death,’ Supreme Court rules.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Rules Against Death-Row Inmate With Rare Health Issue.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court OKs lethal injection for Missouri death row inmate with rare health issue; The opinion, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment ‘does not guarantee a painless death.’”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court rules against death row inmate with rare disease.”

Jacqueline Thomsen of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court rules man can be executed by lethal injection after claim it would cause ‘severe pain.’”

Nina Totenberg of NPR reports that “Supreme Court Closely Divides On ‘Cruel And Unusual’ Death Penalty Case.”

And in commentary, online at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Paul Cassell has a post titled “The Supreme Court Recognizes Victims’ Rights in Death Penalty Cases; The Court acknowledges that crime victims and their families have important interests in the timely enforcement of capital sentences — and encourages lower courts to prevent ‘dilatory’ tactics.”

“A Jury May Have Sentenced a Man to Death Because He’s Gay. Now, the Supreme Court Could Hear His Appeal.” Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Gorsuch just handed down the most bloodthirsty and cruel death penalty opinion of the modern era; The Supreme Court just tossed decades worth of Eighth Amendment law into the wastebasket”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at ThinkProgress.

Part IV to you is Part III to me: Another eagle-eyed “How Appealing” reader emails to note:

The first paragraph of Justice Sotomayor’s dissent in Bucklew says she joins all of Breyer’s dissent except for Part IV, but there isn’t any Part IV. She means Part III.

Perhaps a zillion years from now when the Justices’ private papers become available, we can learn what became of the missing part to Justice Breyer’s dissent.

Thanks much to the reader — someone with whom I have had lunch in real life several times — who forwarded this error to my attention. If last time someone did this is any indication, you may get faster results by picking up the phone and calling the Court’s Reporter of Decisions, who apparently is standing by to receive any and all reports of potential errata.

Update: This error has now been corrected, as clicking here will reveal.

Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued rulings in two argued cases.

1. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the Court in Bucklew v. Precythe, No. 17-8151. Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett M. Kavanaugh issued concurring opinions. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined except as to one part. And Justice Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. And Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Biestek v. Berryhill, No. 17-1184. Justice Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Gorsuch issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined.* You can access the oral argument via this link.

—–
*If my recollection is accurate, this marks the second time this Term that Justice Ginsburg was the only Justice to join in a separate opinion written by Justice Gorsuch. The earlier instance can be accessed here.

In the April 2019 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Court considers whether inquiry about citizenship belongs on the U.S. census.”

Kate Silver has an article headlined “Do court bans on electronic devices impede access to justice?”

Pamela Babcock has an article headlined “Dutch doctor’s abortion-drug prescription service faces legal landmines.”

And this month’s installment of the “Bryan Garner on Words” column by Bryan A. Garner is headlined “Old-fashioned textualism is all about interpretation, not legislating from the bench.”

“Ask the author: ‘The great oracle of American legal thought’ — revisiting the life and times of Justice Holmes.” At “SCOTUSblog,” Ronald Collins has this very interesting post — consisting of his interview with Stephen Budiansky, the author of a new book titled “Oliver Wendell Holmes: A Life in War, Law, and Ideas.”

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court granted review in one new case.