“Trying to pry apart a lawyer’s representational actions from those of his client is like trying to separate Mark Twain from Samuel Clemens.” So writes Sixth Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton in an interesting concurring opinion issued today.

“Title IX investigation ends with IU Maurer professor’s departure”: Marilyn Odendahl of The Indiana Lawyer has this report.

“The Anti-monopoly Backlash Reaches the Supreme Court; In a 5–4 decision, the justices decided not to stand in the way of reining in Big Tech”: Law professor Eric Posner has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“Federal Circuit has No Opinion; Senju Asks the Supreme Court for Its”: Dennis Crouch has this post at his “Patently-O” blog.

“At Supreme Court hearing on lame-duck laws, conservative justices skeptical of claims GOP acted improperly”: Patrick Marley of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has this report.

Riley Vetterkind of The Wisconsin State Journal reports that “Conservative justices signal skepticism of challenge to lame-duck laws.”

And Shawn Johnson of Wisconsin Public Radio reports that “Supreme Court’s Conservatives Strike Skeptical Tone During Lame-Duck Case Arguments; Lawsuit Challenges December’s Lame-Duck Session.”

“Alabama’s Extremist Abortion Bill Ruins John Roberts’ Roe Plan; SCOTUS was all teed up to quietly gut America’s abortion rights; Then Alabama happened”: Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

And online at ThinkProgress, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “Supreme Court is poised to kill Roe v. Wade; If you think this Supreme Court won’t kill Roe v. Wade in an election year, you’re fooling yourself.”

“Abortion restrictions? Partisan election maps? Same-sex wedding cakes? Supreme Court has heard it all before.” Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Gov. Kay Ivey signs near-total abortion ban into law”: Brian Lyman of The Montgomery Advertiser has this report.

“Alabama Bill at Odds With Public Consensus on Abortion”: Lydia Saad of Gallup has this report.

“Alabama Aims Squarely at Roe, but the Supreme Court May Prefer Glancing Blows”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “The race to overturn Roe v. Wade looks to a Supreme Court that prefers gradual change.”

Ronn Blitzer of Fox News reports that “Abortion foes eye Supreme Court showdown in wake of Alabama ban.”

And at Vox, Anna North has an article headlined “Alabama Republicans want to overturn Roe v. Wade. Their strategy could backfire. The Alabama abortion ban’s lack of exceptions for rape or incest could be its downfall.”

“Kenneth Lee — Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit”: Harsh Voruganti has this post at his blog, “The Vetting Room.”

“‘Heartbeat’ Abortion Bans Are Going Nowhere Before 2020; State laws restricting abortion early in pregnancy are still unconstitutional, and there’s no incentive for the Supreme Court to act quickly to change that”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“Sen. Mitt Romney votes against Trump judicial pick over comments he made about Obama”: Thomas Burr of The Salt Lake Tribune has this report.

And Burgess Everett of Politico reports that “Romney rejects Trump judicial pick who smeared Obama.”

“Springtime for Antitrust Lawyers: Justice Kavanaugh joins the liberals to open a new avenue for lawsuits.” This editorial appeared in yesterday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

And online at Bloomberg Opinion, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Kavanaugh Takes a Shot at Apple, and Big Tech Should Take Note; The Supreme Court is more open to antitrust litigation if the newest justice is willing to join liberals on this issue.”

“Supreme Court Justice Gascon releases a statement on his health after his disappearance”: Sean Fine of The Toronto Globe and Mail has this report.

Tonda MacCharles of The Toronto Star reports that “Supreme Court justice says he had panic attack before going missing.”

Peter Zimonjic of CBC News reports that “Supreme Court Justice Gascon attributes disappearance to depression, anxiety.”

And The Canadian Press has a report headlined “Clement Gascon, high court justice who went missing, says he had panic attack; Gascon, who has already announced plans to retire, says he has long dealt with depression and anxiety.”

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada issued this news release on the matter.

“A few thoughts on en banc oral argument: splitting time, the Soliloquy Rule, and flip flops somehow.” Matthew Stiegler has this post at his “CA3blog.”

“Ask the author: ‘So Long, Earl.'” At “SCOTUSblog,” Andrew Hamm has this interview with Michael Bobelian, author of “Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court.”

“Justice Department says FDA ‘lacks jurisdiction’ over death-penalty drugs”: Laurie McGinley and Mark Berman of The Washington Post have this report.

And in today’s edition of The New York Times, Charlie Savage has an article headlined “Justice Dept. Stops F.D.A. From Regulating Death-Penalty Drugs.”

“New witness list filed in Dan Markel murder case”: Julie Montanaro of CBS affiliate WCTV Eyewitness News in Tallahassee has this report.

“Acknowledging His Own Misconduct: Most professors found to have violated Title IX policies don’t share it with the world; This one did, as he resigned.” Colleen Flaherty of Inside Higher Ed has this report.

“Opinion analysis: Hyatt fulfills expectations in a surprising way.” Richard M. Re has this guest post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Experience in the Courtroom, Strong Role Models Give Grad Her Start; Women Role Models Helped Kendall Burchard ’19 Along the Path”: Eric Williamson of the University of Virginia School of Law has this report.

“An initial look at Peter Phipps, Trump’s next Third Circuit nominee”: Matthew Stiegler has this post at his “CA3blog.”

“Court Says FEC Deadlocks Need No Second-Guessing By Judges”: Kenneth P. Doyle of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access).

And at his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen has a post titled “DC Circuit Denies En Banc Consideration in Crew v. FEC Case, Essentially Giving Republican Commissioners Unfettered Ability to Block All Campaign Finance Enforcement Matters with No Judicial Review of the Decision.”

You can access yesterday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denying rehearing en banc, and the opinions concurring in and dissenting from that denial, at this link.

“I write separately to express my continued opposition to the use of conduct for which a defendant was acquitted to increase the length of that person’s sentence.” So wrote D.C. Circuit Judge Patricia A. Millett in a concurring opinion yesterday issued in an appeal involving a noteworthy criminal defendant.