“Academic Constitutional Theory and Judicial Constitutional Practice”: Mark Tushnet has this post at the “Balkinization” blog.

“Reasonable Suspicion From Driver to Car: A Few Thoughts on Kansas v. Glover; Some interesting issues raised by the only Fourth Amendment case currently on the Supreme Court’s docket.” Orin S. Kerr has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“U.S. patent board is unconstitutional, but problem can be fixed: appeals court.” Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued today.

“Grassley to take back Judiciary gavel if GOP keeps Senate in 2020”: Jordain Carney of The Hill has this report.

“Should federal Indian law be textualist? Todd Henderson on the legal status of Eastern Oklahoma.” Will Baude has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“UND Law School hosts North Dakota Supreme Court; Annual sessions garner attention from high school and college students as opportunity for unique discussions with justices”: Hannah Shirley of The Grand Forks Herald has this report.

And Sydney Mook of The Grand Forks Herald reports that “UND law students argue in front of North Dakota Supreme Court.”

“Divisive docket to test Supreme Court ahead of 2020”: Harper Neidig of The Hill has this report.

“Kentucky Supreme Court dismisses suit over company’s refusal to print gay pride shirt”: John Cheves of The Lexington Herald-Leader has this report.

And Morgan Phillips of Fox News reports that “Kentucky Supreme Court dismisses claim against print shop owner who refused to make gay pride T-shirt.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Kentucky at this link.

“Al Sharpton lauds Del. Supreme Court appointment but says courts still need more diversity”: Karl Baker of The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware has this report.

“Ninth Circuit nominee VanDyke cries under Senate questioning”: Gary Martin has this front page article in today’s edition of The Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Hannah Knowles of The Washington Post reports that “Trump judicial nominee cries over scathing letter from the American Bar Association.”

Jeanine Santucci of USA Today reports that “Trump judicial nominee cries at hearing during questioning on attitude toward LGBTQ people.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has articles headlined “Trump pick for 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals accused of having anti-gay views” and “Criminal probe?: American Bar Association accused of bias after VanDyke ‘not qualified’ label.”

Dawson White of The Kansas City Star reports that “Trump’s judicial nominee cries when asked by Congress if he’ll treat gay people fairly.”

Ariane de Vogue and Alex Rogers of CNN report that “‘Not qualified’ rating and accusation from American Bar Association moves Trump nominee to tears.”

Ronn Blitzer of Fox News reports that “Trump judicial pick breaks down in tears at hearing over legal group’s attack.”

Harper Neidig of The Hill reports that “Judicial nominee breaks down amid question about attitude toward LGBT people.”

Guro Halleraker of TV 2 in Norway reports that “Trumps dommerkandidat begynte å gråte under høring; Dommernominerte Lawrence VanDyke gråt da han ble konfrontert om sine holdninger til LHBTQ-samfunnet under høring.”

Verna Vuoripuro of Helsingin Sanomat of Finland reports that “Trumpin tuomari­ehdokas murtui kyyneliin senaatin kuulemisessa: ‘Olen pettynyt, järkyttynyt ja loukkaantunut’; Republikaani­enemmistöinen senaatti on hyväksynyt viisi Trumpin nimittämää tuomaria, jotka asianajajaliitto oli todennut epäpäteviksi.”

In commentary, today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial titled “The ABA Strikes Again: The lawyers’ guild tries to defeat another conservative nominee.”

Also in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Adam J. White has an op-ed titled “Another Smear Campaign From the American Bar Association; The lawyers group declares Lawrence VanDyke ‘not qualified’ based on claims from anonymous critics.”

And online at Fox News, Hiram Sasser has an essay titled “Trump judicial pick in tears — Left has again deployed lies, smears to destroy a nominee.”

Disagreeing with two other state courts of last resort, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania holds that the U.S. Supreme Court‘s ruling in Birchfield v. North Dakota does not apply retroactively on post-conviction collateral review: Today’s ruling of Pennsylvania’s highest court in Commonwealth v. Olson consists of a majority opinion, a concurring opinion, and two dissenting opinions (here and here).

“Why Impeachment Could Be a Nightmare for Chief Justice John Roberts”: Tessa Berenson of Time magazine has this report.

“This Hidden Rule Could Make It Impossible to Fight an Abortion Ban in Court; Buried inside a new Supreme Court case is a ‘wrecking ball’ that could devastate abortion access”: Marie Solis of Vice has this report.

“A Federal Court May Soon Do What Congress Could Not: Obliterate Obamacare; Thousands organized to save the Affordable Care Act in 2017; Now the entire law may be struck down when no one’s looking.” Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.