“U.S. Supreme Court acts quickly to settle whether ban on split juries is retroactive”: John Simerman of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans has this report.

And Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court to weigh case over nonunanimous jury convictions.”

“Tax-Avoidance Case, Suits Against IRS Get Supreme Court Review”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“Justice Thomas’s Question Time: Telephone arguments aren’t ideal, but here’s a significant silver lining.” The Wall Street Journal has published this editorial.

“Pennsylvania: U.S. Supreme Court should not intervene in coronavirus shutdown.” Peter Hall of The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania has this report on the response Pennsylvania filed today to an application for stay pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Supreme Court Hears First Arguments via Phone; The conference call started with the usual Oyez! chant, but that was almost the only traditional thing about the arguments in a trademark case”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court takes modest but historic step with teleconference hearings.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Coronavirus pushes Supreme Court to allow first-ever live broadcast of arguments.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court’s First Teleconferenced Argument, Heard Live, Is Practically Glitch-Free; No mention of the ‘mute’ button; Clarence Thomas proves a lively questioner in relatively dry hearing.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court hears first case by telephone, with audio livestreamed.”

Jessica Gresko and Mark Sherman of The Associated Press have a report headlined “Called to order: Supreme Court holds 1st arguments by phone.”

Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung of Reuters report that “Smooth sailing in U.S. Supreme Court’s first teleconference case; Thomas joins fray.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News report that “Supreme Court Tele-Argument Brings Minor Hiccups, Thomas Questions.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court makes history with oral arguments by phone; But it’s business as usual for justices; For the first time, the audio of the argument was available live, streamed on news websites and available on C-SPAN.”

From CNN, Ariane de Vogue has a report headlined “‘Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!’ The Supreme Court is live on the air.” And Devan Cole, Joan Biskupic, and de Vogue have a report headlined “Clarence Thomas breaks silence on bench during Supreme Court’s first remote oral argument.”

Tyler Olson and Bill Mears of Fox News have reports headlined “Supreme Court holds unprecedented, remote oral arguments as cases move forward despite coronavirus” and “Justice Thomas asks rare round of questions during Supreme Court oral arguments, in teleconference session.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico reports that “Virus prompts first-ever arguments by phone at Supreme Court; Protocol for conference-call session stirs normally mum Clarence Thomas to ask several questions.”

Todd Ruger of Roll Call reports that “Supreme Court sails through first online oral argument; Roberts attempts to keep everything business as usual.”

John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Justice Clarence Thomas breaks silence during Supreme Court’s first teleconference hearing.”

At “SCOTUSblog,” Mark Walsh has a post titled “A ‘view’ from my laptop: Arguments.com.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Live-Streams Oral Argument For 1st Time In History.”

In commentary, online at The New York Times, columnist Jesse Wegman has an essay titled “Live From D.C., It’s the Supreme Court! The court heard oral arguments remotely, and broadcast the audio live, for the first time Monday; It was a spectacle made for the radio age.”

Online at The Los Angeles Times, columnist Michael McGough hsa an essay titled “Clarence Thomas speaks and other notable events from Supreme Court livestream.”

And online at CNN, Elie Honig has an essay titled “The sky didn’t fall when the Supreme Court went live.”

“Religion ruling expected to be issue in judge’s nomination”: Ryan Lovelace of The Washington Times has an article that begins, “Judge Justin Walker’s ruling in the church-vs.-state showdown over stay-at-home orders is expected to be a key issue Tuesday when the Senate considers his nomination to the nation’s premier federal appellate court.”

“Meet the Trump Judge Arguing the Government Can Execute People Any Way It Wants; The success of these judges, it turns out, is in part attributable to cold, hard cash”: Lisa Needham has this essay online at Rewire.News.

“Appeals Court Vacancy Is Under Scrutiny Ahead of Contested Confirmation Hearing; The chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit publicly advanced a call by a progressive group for an ethics investigation into the circumstances of a plum vacancy”: Carl Hulse will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“The Supreme Court Just Proved Its Secretive Rules Are Silly and Counterproductive; The justices proved they can do good law in public; We’ll soon learn whether they dare do bad law right before our eyes”: Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Qualified Immunity: A Free Pass for Abuse?” Kenneth Jost has this post at his “Jost on Justice” blog.

“Courtroom access: Let’s talk data — the public line.” Amy Howe has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Stay Frustrated”: You can access via this link today’s new installment of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast featuring law professors Melissa Murray and Kate Shaw and their guest, Emily Bazelon.

“The Supreme Court’s Surreal, Stilted, and Surprisingly Normal Streaming Oral Argument; The Chief strictly kept time, Justice Thomas asked questions, and I think Justice Sotomayor was on mute”: Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

Access the live audio of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V. Via C-SPAN at this link.

“The Fight Over the Affordable Care Act and Birth Control Is Back at the Supreme Court”: David H. Gans has this essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court to hear 2 cases about when religious employers can ignore civil rights laws; The stakes in the Supreme Court’s ‘ministerial exemption’ cases are profound”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Live-Streamed and Teleconferenced, the Supreme Court Enters the Coronavirus Era; After canceling its scheduled arguments in March and April, the court agreed to hear 10 of those cases remotely over the next two weeks”: Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal have this report.

And Todd Ruger of Roll Call reports that “Live and online: Supreme Court breaks new ground this week; Justices will hold oral arguments via telephone for the first time.”

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