“Judicial distancing: Mystery surrounds Supreme Court path forward amid coronavirus; Thirty-six cases are pending, including some of the most important to reach the justices in decades.” Pete Williams of NBC News has this report.

“Supreme Court justices meet privately amid coronavirus outbreak”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.

“Court Skeptical Trump Unlawfully Expanded Obamacare Alternative”: Lydia Wheeler of Bloomberg Law has this report.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has announced the cancellation of its 2020 Judicial Conference: I received notice of the cancellation by email as someone who had already registered to attend. The event was scheduled to take place in Philadelphia from May 13-15, 2020.

Update: Relatedly, a helpful reader has emailed to draw to my attention that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit yesterday issued an announcement stating that its “May 15, 2020 Federal Circuit Judicial Conference Cancelled.”

“Attorneys ask U.S. Supreme Court to consider Tennessee’s refugee resettlement lawsuit”: Joel Ebert of The Tennessean has this report.

The Supreme Court of Indiana held an in-person oral argument today in a car crash case, and the justices did not even sit at least six feet apart: You can view the oral argument video via this link.

And Katie Stancombe of The Indiana Lawyer reports on the oral argument in an article headlined “Supreme Court hears arguments in stoplight crash suit against IPL.”

“We Held an Election During the 1918 Flu Epidemic. We Can Hold an Election Now.” David H. Gans has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Coronavirus: Ohio Supreme Court moving to rule quickly on primary election dispute.” Randy Ludlow of The Columbus Dispatch has this report.

“Supreme Court Relaxes Filing Deadlines Due to Coronavirus”: Jordan S. Rubin of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Ohio Supreme Court chief justice calls for ‘uniform buy-in’ among judges in response to coronavirus pandemic”: Cory Shaffer of The Cleveland Plain Dealer has this report.

“What next for oral arguments?” Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“New Zealand Eases Abortion Restrictions; The change was welcomed by abortion rights advocates, but even in that camp some wondered if lawmakers had gone too far”: Richard Pérez-Peña has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

And Amelia Wade of The New Zealand Herald reports that “Abortion law reform passes third reading.”

“Big Supreme Court opinions could come amid coronavirus outbreak; LGBT rights, gun rights and immigration all on tap during this term”: Todd Ruger of Roll Call has this report.

“The Quorum Rule”: Jack Metzler has posted this paper, forthcoming in the Green Bag 2d, online at SSRN.

“Watchdog Group Demands Probe of D.C. Circuit Judge’s Retirement”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson and Madison Alder of Bloomberg Law have a report that begins, “Demand Justice, a progressive judicial watchdog group, is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to investigate whether Judge Thomas Griffith’s recently-announced decision to retire violated ethics rules.”

“Fight for Justice Blackwell’s Seat Heads to Ga. Supreme Court, Teeing Up Potential Conflict of Interest; The Georgia Court of Appeals on Thursday transferred an emergency appeal over whether to reinstate an election for state Supreme Court Justice Keith Blackwell’s seat to the state Supreme Court for a ruling”: R. Robin McDonald of The Daily Report of Fulton County, Georgia has this article.

“Dela. Supreme Court: Companies can pick forum for shareholders’ Section 11 claims.” Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“Brennan’s Best or the Court’s Worst?” John O. McGinnis has this post at the redesigned “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Coronavirus may force tech-averse Supreme Court into modern era”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.

Sixth Circuit judge who concurred in part and dissented in part from the majority’s resolution offers his own proposed majority opinion if only a colleague had joined with him: These are unusual, perhaps even unprecedented times for many, many reasons. Yesterday, however, for the first time in this blog’s nearly 18 years of existence, a federal appellate judge writing separately issued his own proposed majority opinion that merely lacked the vote of a second colleague on the three-judge panel.

The judge who did that was Sixth Circuit Judge Chad A. Readler. His opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part issued yesterday can be accessed here. and the portion of his opinion in which he shares how he would have written the majority opinion, if only his position had garnered another vote, begins at this link following the statement, “Were I to write the contract interpretation section of the majority opinion, it would read something like this:”

“Outbreaks of disease have shuttered the Supreme Court going back more than 2 centuries”: Mark Walsh has this report online at ABA Journal.

“The Federal Courts Begin to Adapt to COVID-19”: Robert Loeb, Katie Kopp, and Melanie Hallums have this post at the “Lawfare” blog.

“The One Change John Roberts Can Make to Depoliticize the Supreme Court; To stop Chuck Schumer or Donald Trump from attacking individual members of the court, the chief justice should make anonymous opinions the norm”: Scott S. Boddery has this essay online at Politico Magazine.

“D.C. Circuit Halts Oral Arguments, Echoing Other Appeals Courts”: Madison Alder of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Hogan Lovells Partner Cate Stetson Looks Ahead to Milestone of 100 Appellate Arguments; Hogan Lovells’ Cate Stetson speaks about how she prepares for oral arguments (spoiler alert: it involves cheeseburgers) and why so few women argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.” Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal has this report.

“Supreme Court Lawyers Brace for Uncertainty After Postponement”: Jordan S. Rubin and Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law have this report.

“To stop coronavirus, Michigan Supreme Court orders emergency procedures”: Frank Witsil of The Detroit Free Press has a report that begins, “Including a personal reference to her own 80-year-old father, Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Bridget McCormack explained Monday the extraordinary emergency procedures that the coronavirus outbreak has forced courts to adopt.”

“Tight race to fill seat once held by Illinois Supreme Court Justice Charles Freeman, the only person of color to be elected to the state’s highest court”: Antonia Ayres-Brown of The Chicago Tribune has this report.

And Jon Seidel of The Chicago Sun-Times reports that “Neville looks poised to hold Illinois Supreme Court seat, but Reyes makes strong challenge; A campaign dominated by questions of diversity did not have a clear winner late Tuesday evening.”

“Pa. Supreme Court Justice Wecht under self-quarantine after son presumptively tests positive”: Andrew Goldstein of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has this report.

“Farmers, Ranchers Get Circuit Court Win in Jaguar Habitat Case”: Maya Earls of Bloomberg Environment has this report (subscription required for full access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued today.

“‘Inside Out’ Copyright Lawsuit Rejected by Appeals Court”: Gene Maddaus of Variety has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued Monday.

“With family member testing positive for coronavirus, Pa. Supreme Court justice, family self-quarantining”: Paul Vigna of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has this report.

“For Supreme Court Advocates, Virus-Era Delays Pose ‘Stay Fresh’ Challenge; Preparation for U.S. Supreme Court arguments happens weeks in advance; The court’s postponement of March arguments has fueled uncertainty in the virus era”: Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal has this report.

“The Coronavirus Crisis: As People Keep Their Distance, Keep the Constitution Close.” The New York Sun has published this editorial.

“Should the size of the Supreme Court expand to change the ideological balance? | Pro/Con.” The Philadelphia Inquirer has posted this point-counterpoint discussion online today.