“Supreme Court asked to decide if Electoral College voters are bound to the state’s winner”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.

“Logjam of abortions cases pressures Supreme Court to consider when life begins; Conservative-leaning bench could weaken Roe”: Alex Swoyer has this front page article in today’s edition of The Washington Times.

And Joan Biskupic of CNN reports that “Abortion case adds to turmoil facing Chief Justice John Roberts.”

“Gay rights battle against employment discrimination extends beyond the grave, and to the Supreme Court”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“From smears to cheers: Justice Kavanaugh cements Trump ‘judicial legacy’ in first year on court.” Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

“Supreme Court Weighs Ending Non-Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Cases”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report, along with an article headlined “Supreme Court Opens New Term With Argument on Insanity Defense.”

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court’s new term opens with arguments over unanimous juries, insanity as a criminal defense.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Opens Term With Look at Kansas’ Effort to Bar Insanity Defense; Several justices balk at seeing historical rights of defendants reduced; less-than-unanimous convictions also on docket.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court, trying to remain above the partisan fray, opens 2019 term with a debate about insanity.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Kansas man’s insanity defense case earns little sympathy from Supreme Court justices.”

Tim Carpenter of The Topeka Capital-Journal reports that “U.S. Supreme Court weighs constitutionality of Kansas’ approach to insanity defense.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Court seems ready to require unanimous juries as term opens.”

Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung of Reuters report that “U.S. Supreme Court opens new term, with an ill Justice Thomas absent.”

In commentary, online at Bloomberg Opinion, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “The Supreme Court Should Let the States Define Insanity; Our legal understanding of mental illness shouldn’t be restricted to a 19th-century precedent.”

And online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court Looks Poised to Outlaw Split Jury Verdicts; Even Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch seemed ready to strike down the racist relic.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Kahler v. Kansas, No. 18-6135.

And you can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Ramos v. Louisiana, No. 18-5924.

“Is The Supreme Court Heading For A Conservative Revolution?” Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux of FiveThirtyEight has this report.

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

“A ‘view’ from the courtroom: Two-minute warning.” Mark Walsh has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“The Conservative Black Nationalism of Clarence Thomas: Joshua Cohen and Corey Robin discuss the black nationalism at the heart of Thomas’s conservative jurisprudence — and what it means for those on the left who often dismiss the justice’s use of race.” Boston Review recently posted this discussion onilne.

“Men Get Stereotyped Too. It’s Time the Court Acknowledges It. The LGBTQ rights cases at the Supreme Court turn on stereotypes of what it means to be male.” Law professor Carliss Chatman has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Rights of Gay Employees Up Next on Supreme Court Docket; Civil Rights Act of 1964 barring workplace discrimination has been open to interpretation”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Dan Markel trial: Wiretaps reveal web of communication between murder suspects.” Karl Etters of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“Fighting for Abortion Access in the South: A fund in Georgia is responding to restrictive legislation with a familial kind of care.” Alexis Okeowo has this article in the October 14, 2019 issue of The New Yorker.

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court did not grant review in any new cases.

In N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol v. New York, No. 18-280, the Court denied respondents’ Suggestion of Mootness but directed the parties to be prepared to discuss that issue at oral argument.

“Insanity and the Supreme Court: The defense may be unpopular, but it’s a fundamental part of due process.” Law professor Stephen J. Morse and Richard J. Bonnie have this essay online at The Wall Street Journal.

“One of the most politically volatile terms in years tests John Roberts and the Supreme Court”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

Brent Kendall and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court to Weigh Hot-Button Issues Amid Tense Political Backdrop; New term beginning Monday will include cases on abortion, gay rights, gun rights and DACA.”

Shannon Bream and Bill Mears of Fox News report that “Supreme Court kicks off election-year agenda with hot-button immigration, guns and abortion cases.”

And this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Term Preview.”

“Trump administration plans to delay any changes if the ACA loses in court”: Paige Winfield Cunningham and Yasmeen Abutaleb of The Washington Post have an article that begins, “The Trump administration, with no viable plan for replacing critical health benefits for millions of Americans, plans to seek a stay if a federal appeals court invalidates all or part of the Affordable Care Act in the coming weeks — and may try to delay a potential Supreme Court hearing on the matter until after the 2020 presidential election, according to current and former administration officials.”

“The Supreme Court Will Soon Test Its Commitment to Abortion Rights; In a new case, the justices will reconsider past decisions that have protected women’s ability to terminate their pregnancies”: Emma Green of The Atlantic has this report.

Jessica Glenza of The Guardian (UK) reports that “Supreme court to consider abortion law almost identical to one it just rejected; In 2016, the court called Texas restrictions unconstitutional; But the makeup of justices has shifted prior to a similar Louisiana case.”

Jessie Hellmann of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court abortion case poses major test for Trump picks.”

At the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center, Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Where is the Supreme Court going on abortion?”

At the “Democracy in America” blog of The Economist, Steven Mazie has a post titled “At a crossroads: The Supreme Court will review abortion-clinic rules in Louisiana; The case gives the new conservative majority its first chance to chip away at abortion rights.”

And in commentary, online at National Review, David French has an essay titled “Will the Justices Be Bold on Abortion? he Supreme Court will hear the most important pro-life case in a generation.”

“Brett Kavanaugh and the supreme court: here comes trouble; As the justices reconvene for a term that may even include an impeachment trial, two books fire opening shots that miss.” Lloyd Green has this review of two recent books online at The Guardian (UK).

“The Supreme Court Isn’t Your Friend, Liberals; Since Andrew Jackson added two cronies to create the now hallowed nine-Justice court, it’s almost always served as a reactionary instrument against workers and the popular will”: Jack Schwartz has this essay online at The Daily Beast.

And online at Fox News, Tim Chapman has an essay titled “Progressives’ plan to fundamentally alter Supreme Court would make it a political football.”

“It’s not the Supreme Court’s job to say whether ‘sex’ includes sexual orientation”: Columnist George F. Will has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

Online at The Washington Post, Chase Strangio has an essay titled “I’m a transgender attorney fighting for my community. Will that make a difference to the Supreme Court?”

And online at The Gainesville (Ga.) Times, Connie Galloway has an essay titled “Georgia man’s Supreme Court fight shows what many LGBTQ people — including me — have endured.”

“Gay, transgender rights in spotlight as U.S. Supreme Court returns”: Lawrence Hurley of Reuters has this report.

“Christian florist could lose everything if Supreme Court doesn’t weigh in, lawyer says”: Evie Fordham of Fox Business has this report.

“Impeachment Fight Lurks as Supreme Court Tackles Divisive Issues”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“U.S. Supreme Court to take up Louisiana justice in split-jury case on opening day of new term”: John Simerman has this front page article in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.

John Hanna of The Associated Press reports that “US Supreme Court to review Kansas’ lack of insanity defense.”

Tucker Higgins of CNBC reports that “Supreme Court puts ‘insanity defense’ and split juries in focus as it hears arguments over two grisly murder cases.”

And in commentary, online at The Atlantic, law professor Garrett Epps has an essay titled “Does the Constitution Guarantee a Right to an Insanity Defense? When the Court opens its October 2019 term, it will face a pressing criminal-justice question: Can states abolish the insanity defense?“

“As the Supreme Court Gets Back to Work, Five Big Cases to Watch; In its first full term since the arrival of Justice Kavanaugh, the court could issue a number of blockbuster decisions on divisive issues in an election year”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court’s blockbuster term hits with LGBT, abortion, DACA and more.”

In commentary, today’s edition of The New York Times contains an editorial titled “Watch Out, America — The Supreme Court Is Back in Session; And conservatives could be the big winners.”

Online at Fox News, Carrie Severino and Gayle Trotter have an essay titled “Supreme Court facing major cases — and serious challenges to its independence.”

The National Constitution Center recently posted on YouTube a video titled “We the People Featuring SCOTUStalk: A Supreme Court Preview.”

And the new installment of Slate’s “Amicus” podcast featuring Dahlia Lithwick with law professor Erwin Chemerinsky is titled “Get Ready for the Most Significant Supreme Court Term in a Decade; The justices are tackling abortion, guns, DACA, and LGBTQ rights.”

“Appeal filed after court’s ruling on Harvard’s admissions”: Danny McDonald of The Boston Globe has this report.

And Camille G. Caldera of The Harvard Crimson reports that “Students for Fair Admissions Files Notice of Appeal in Harvard Admissions Case.”

“Justice Ginsburg’s assessment of today’s political climate: ‘an aberration.'” Laurie Loisel of The Boston Globe has this report.

By Jim Russell of The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts reports that “Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg discusses state of nation, Roe v. Wade at Amherst College.”

Jacquelyn Voghel of The Daily Hampshire Gazette of Northampton, Massachusetts reports that “Ginsburg holds court at Amherst College.”

Caroline Kelly of CNN has a report headlined “Ruth Bader Ginsburg: This time in history will be seen as ‘an aberration.’”

And Caeli Chesin and Brian Choquet of Amherst Wire have a report headlined “‘I would be a great diva!’: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg brings laughs and inspiration to Amherst College; U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg answers questions about her experiences to the Amherst College community.”

Amherst College has posted on YouTube a video titled “U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in Conversation with President Biddy Martin.”

“Clerks at 100 Academic Symposium”: The GW LAW Moot Stream has posted the video of this event from earlier today on YouTube.

“Dan Markel murder: Prosecutors lay out alleged payments; case may be going to jury Wednesday.” Karl Etters of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

And Nate Chute of The Tallahassee Democrat has a report headlined “Dan Markel trial: Timeline of calls between Adelson family, suspects the day Markel died.”

“Here’s How We Know the Supreme Court Is Preparing to Devastate Abortion Rights: There’s no other reason for the justices to take up the Louisiana abortion case.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The new Supreme Court term starts next week. Expect fireworks on abortion, LGBTQ rights, and immigration. It’s going to be a blockbuster term for the Court, which will take on abortion, guns, immigration, discrimination — and potentially Obamacare.” Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Supreme Court term to be punctuated by presidential politics; Docket ‘almost guarantees’ court shifting further and faster to the right, expert says”: Todd Ruger of Roll Call has this report.

“Supreme Court to Hear Abortion Case From Louisiana”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court to review ruling on Louisiana abortion law.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court takes first big abortion case since Kavanaugh joined the court.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court agrees to rule on abortion restrictions, setting up contentious election year debate.”

Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Agrees to Review Louisiana Abortion Restrictions; The high court struck down a similar law in Texas in 2016.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court to hear Louisiana abortion regulation case.”

Elizabeth Crisp of The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana reports that “U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Louisiana abortion case; here’s what’s next.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court to hear abortion regulation case.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court takes major case that could curb abortion access.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Agrees to Hear First Abortion Case With Kavanaugh.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court to take up Louisiana law limiting access of abortion doctors; The law would leave only a single doctor to perform abortions in the entire state, women’s groups say.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court says it will consider Louisiana abortion access law.”

Shannon Bream and Bill Mears of Fox News report that “Supreme Court agrees to review Louisiana abortion case.”

Alice Miranda Ollstein reports that “SCOTUS will review Louisiana abortion law, setting up blockbuster election year showdown.”

Jessie Hellmann of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court to hear Louisiana abortion case.”

And Ema O’Connor of BuzzFeed News reports that “The Supreme Court Will Take Up A Major Abortion Rights Case; The Louisiana law the court will review requires abortion clinics to have hospital admitting privileges; Opponents say it could result in nearly all of the state’s clinics closing.”

“This Supreme Court Term Will Launch a Conservative Revolution; The court tried to lay low after the Kavanaugh hearings; This year, it will take center stage in the 2020 election”: Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.