“Rules can be bent when Supreme Court says so”: Columnist Bill Cotterell has this essay online at The Tallahassee Democrat.

“Stage is set for KY Supreme Court to decide whether Beshear’s COVID-19 orders will stand”: Jack Brammer of The Lexington Herald-Leader has this report.

And Ben Tobin of The Louisville Courier Journal reports that “Beshear, Cameron submit briefs to state Supreme Court in COVID-19 emergency orders case.”

“Is a using a racial slur free speech or a crime? Connecticut Supreme Court reinstates conviction of man who shouted slur at parking officer in a ‘Fighting Words’ case”: Edmund H. Mahony of The Hartford Courant has this report.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a post titled “Fighting Words in the Connecticut Supreme Court; Three interesting opinions: a sound majority, a plausible concurrence, and another concurrence focused on ‘hate speech’ that I think is unsound.”

Thursday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Connecticut consisted of a majority opinion and two concurring opinions (here and here).

“Could It Be Bush v. Gore All Over Again? The scenarios that keep me up at night.” Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Republicans make the courts a feature of their convention; Democrats do not, and liberals are worried”: Seung Min Kim of The Washington Post has this report.

“COVID-19 case delays Michigan Supreme Court hearing on Whitmer’s emergency powers”: Beth LeBlanc of The Detroit News has this report.

According to the article, “The court assistant fighting COVID-19 is an ‘indispensable’ team member who helps Justice Richard Bernstein, who is blind, ‘to review and internalize thousands of pages of material,’ Bernstein said in a statement.”

“Kanawha to hold first jury trial during pandemic, WV Supreme Court returns to in-person arguments this week”: Joe Severino has this front page article in today’s edition of The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette-Mail.