“The Other Police Immunity Problem; Departments escape accountability under a 1978 Supreme Court ruling”: Law professor Peter H. Schuck has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Michael Flynn Gets His Writ; An appellate court orders Judge Sullivan to dismiss the charges”: This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“The Flynn decision doesn’t pass the smell test”: Columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

“Radical justice: Will Clarence Thomas stick it out for a 30th year on the court? Some conservatives would like Donald Trump’s favourite justice to step aside.” Steven Mazie has this article in the June 27, 2020 issue of The Economist.

“Justices have a lot to say, but all is quiet in the Supreme Court”: Mark Walsh has this report online at ABA Journal.

“The Abolition of Man and Woman: If each of us is defined by a ‘gender identity’ related only arbitrarily to sex, we are all transgender now.” In today’s edition of The Wall street Journal, David Crawford, Michael Hanby, and Margaret Harper McCarthy have an op-ed that begins, “A commonplace assumption of American liberalism, that courts merely preside over contests of rights, conceals the judiciary’s limitless power to decide questions of truth without thinking deeply or even honestly about them. Bostock v. Clayton County is a case in point.”

“Covid Crisis Could Bring First for Roberts Court: July Opinions.” Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson and Jordan S. Rubin of Bloomberg Law have this report (subscription required for full access).

“Five Years Later, How Obergefell Paved the Way for Bostock and the DACA Decision”: Evan Wolfson has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Unbundling DACA and Unpacking Regents: What Chief Justice Roberts Got Right.” Benjamin Eidelson has this guest post at the “Balkinization” blog.

“Trump Judge Neomi Rao’s Flynn Opinion Is Dangerous and Anti-Democratic”: Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “The court decision dismissing charges against Michael Flynn is astonishingly bad; Neomi Rao rides again.”

“Errors of Will and of Judgment”: At the “Law & Liberty” blog, John O. McGinnis has a post that begins, “The law can be marred by both results-oriented decisions and honest, intellectual mistakes. Both kinds of distortions were on display at the Supreme Court last week.”

“The Deeply Concerning, Misguided D.C. Circuit Mandamus Ruling in the Flynn Case”: Marty Lederman has this post at the “Just Security” blog.

At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Paul Cassell has a post titled “The D.C. Circuit’s Dubious Decision Ordering the Flynn Case Dismissed; A 2-1 ruling concludes that the district court cannot even hold a hearing on the subject.”

And also at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin S. Kerr has a post titled “In re Michael Flynn as Bush v. Gore; A thought on [the] D.C. Circuit ruling.”

Access online today’s ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in an argued case: Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, 19-161. Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion. Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined. And Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Elena Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.