“U.S. Rep. Kelly returns to Pa. Supreme Court as U.S. Supreme Court mulls election appeal”: Ed Palattella of The Erie Times-News has this report.

“Census Delays Would Prevent Trump Immigrant Exclusion Plan; House panel says internal schedules indicate bureau is scheduled to deliver apportionment figures after Trump leaves office”: Janet Adamy of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Alaska Supreme Court orders jury trials suspended until March”: Michelle Theriault Boots of The Anchorage Daily News has an article that begins, “The Alaska Supreme Court has ordered jury trials suspended until March 2021, the latest in a series of postponements of in-person caused by the coronavirus pandemic.”

“Ohio Supreme Court disbars Columbus lawyer whose ‘pants are charred’ by his volume of lies”: Randy Ludlow of The Columbus Dispatch has this report on a ruling that the Supreme Court of Ohio issued today.

“Alaska Supreme Court chief justice announces retirement”: Michelle Theriault Boots of The Anchorage Daily News has an article that begins, “Alaska Supreme Court Chief Justice Joel Bolger says he plans to retire next year.”

“Trump has appointed a lot of judges. But they won’t necessarily do what he wants.” Columnist Max Boot has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Supreme Court Weighs Sweep of Its Ruling on Non-Unanimous Jury Verdicts; If a decision from April is made retroactive, thousands of inmates in Louisiana, Oregon and Puerto Rico may be entitled to new trials”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court weighs whether its ruling requiring unanimous juries should be applied retroactively.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Justices Consider Retroactivity for Decision Requiring Unanimous Juries for Criminal Convictions; In Louisiana, Oregon and Puerto Rico, hundreds or thousands of convictions could be overturned.”

John Simerman of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans reports that “U.S. Supreme Court debates Louisiana split-jury law’s impact as it weighs applying it retroactively.”

Jordan S. Rubin of Bloomberg Law reports that “Justices Divided on Making Jury Unanimity Decision Retroactive.”

Megan Mineiro of Courthouse News Service reports that “New Jury-Unanimity Rule Stirs Debate on Retroactive Effect.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Weighs Whether All Non-Unanimous Jury Verdicts Are Unconstitutional.”

And in commentary, The Los Angeles Times has published an editorial titled “Defendants convicted by non-unanimous juries should get new trials.”

You can access via this link the audio and transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Edwards v. Vannoy, No. 19-5807.

“‘Fearless trailblazer’ Justice Sonia Sotomayor to youth: Get involved in your community; ‘Your vision only happens with hard work and commitment to doing the right thing,’ the first Hispanic justice tells the younger generation.” Cynthia Silva of NBC News has this report.

And Marina Pitofsky of The Hill reports that “Sotomayor says she worried Obama just had her on Supreme Court short list ‘for show.’”

The Facebook page “Red Table Talk: The Estefans” has posted online the video of a conversation titled “Episode 8: Powerful Life Lessons from Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.”

“Court upholds North Carolina’s voter identification law”: Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post has this report.

Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reports that “Appeals court gives OK to North Carolina voter-ID law.”

Will Doran of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina has an article headlined “NC lawmakers get a win in voter ID court case. Here’s what that could mean.”

Michael Hewlett of The Winston-Salem Journal reports that “Federal court backs voter ID law in North Carolina, reversing decision of lower court.”

Brian Gordon of The Fayetteville Observer reports that “Federal appeals court removes big hurdle to North Carolina voter ID law; Republican state leaders applauded the decision that could make NC voters show ID to vote in the 2022 election.”

And Jordan Williams of The Hill reports that “Appeals court reverses injunction on North Carolina voter ID law.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“Religious liberty and Covid 19: The US Supreme Court and the French Conseil d’Etat.” Sean A. Smith has this post at his “Ikuta Matata” blog.

A sign of the changing times at the Ninth Circuit: Today, an 11-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided a case in which the judges divided purely along the lines of which political party’s president had appointed them (the Ninth Circuit maintains this convenient list containing that data).

But, showing the impact that President Trump’s appointees have had on that court, the majority consisted of six Repubican-appointed judges — including three Trump appointees — while the dissent consisted of five judges appointed by Democratic presidents.

“Under-reacting to SCOTUS Theocracy”: Michael C. Dorf has this post at his blog, “Dorf on Law.”

“Briefing begins in US v. Arthrex”: Dennis Crouch has this post at his “Patently-O” blog.

“This appeal requires us to decide whether a method-of-execution claim that would have the necessary effect of preventing the prisoner’s execution should be brought as a civil-rights action or as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.” So begins the majority opinion of Chief Judge William H. Pryor Jr. that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

Circuit Judge Beverly B. Martin issued a strenuous dissent.

In earlier news coverage, Curt Yeomans of The Gwinnett Daily Post reported in January 2020 that “Convicted Gwinnett murderer — who once wanted death sentence tossed — now wants to die by firing squad.”

“Prosecutor says Tahlequah officers’ fatal shooting of hammer-wielding man was justified; Hammer-toting man was shot four times by Tahlequah police”: Paris Burris of The Tulsa World had this article back in November 2016.

Yesterday, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a decision holding that the police officers involved in the shooting were not entitled to the entry of summary judgment in their favor based on qualified immunity on the civil rights excessive force claim brought against them by the decedant’s estate.

“$5 Million Civil Rights Suit Against City of L.A. Revived; Ninth Circuit Says Summary Judgment Improperly Granted; Declares That Jury Could Find That Detective Violated Gun Owner’s Due Process Rights by Not Giving Notice of Impending Destruction of Collection”: Metropolitan News-Enterprise has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

“DHS Public Charge Rule for Immigrants Halted by Ninth Circuit”: Mary Anne Pazanowski of Bloomberg Law has this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.

“Did the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Restrictions at Houses of Worship Herald a Big Shift? Maybe Not.” Tony Mauro has this post online at Freedom Forum.

“Confusing Supreme Court counsel with their clients”: Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Defendant Gets New Trial for Felon-in-Possession Conviction”: Bernie Pazanowski of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access) on an en banc ruling, totaling 116 pages, that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued yesterday.

“FDA E-Cig Rule Constitutional Despite Challenged Official’s Role”: Martina Barash of Bloomberg Law has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued yesterday.

“Kansas gets a new Supreme Court justice, and probably a new front in the abortion war”: Dion Lefler of The Wichita Eagle has an article that begins, “Gov. Laura Kelly has named longtime appellate Judge Melissa Taylor Standridge to the Kansas Supreme Court, despite opposition from anti-abortion forces that could make picking Standridge’s replacement on the appeals court a political battle.”

“California officials urge U.S. Supreme Court to leave coronavirus restrictions on churches in place”: Sean Emery has this front page article in today’s edition of The Orange County Register.

And Dale Kasler of The Sacramento Bee has an article headlined “‘Biblical mandate.’ California churches ready to defy Newsom after Supreme Court ruling.”

“Experts Envision Roads to Supreme Court for Harvard Admissions Lawsuit”: Dohyun Kim of The Harvard Crimson has this report.

“Trump’s Pa. allies appeal legal bid to overturn the election to SCOTUS, even as Barr says there’s no evidence of widespread fraud”: Jeremy Roebuck of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report.

Kevin McCoy and Richard Wolf of USA Today report that “Lawsuit by Trump allies challenging Pennsylvania election results reaches Supreme Court.”

Adam Smeltz of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has an article headlined “Attorney: U.S. Supreme Court asked to hear challenge to Pennsylvania’s mail-in voting.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Trump Allies Ask High Court to Nullify Biden’s Pennsylvania Win.”

Dan Mangan of CNBC reports that “Rep. Mike Kelly asks Supreme Court to nullify Biden win over Trump in Pennsylvania as he challenges mail-in ballot rule.”

Tal Axelrod of The Hill reports that “Cruz urges Supreme Court to take up Pennsylvania election challenge.”

And in commentary, The Erie Times-News has published an editorial titled “Kelly again picks the wrong fight.”

“Only 9 Trials in 9 Months: Virus Wreaks Havoc on N.Y.C. Courts; The coronavirus has upended criminal trials in the city, infiltrating courtrooms in ways that threaten both health and justice.” Nicole Hong and Jan Ransom have this front page article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Religious conservatives have won a revolutionary victory in the Supreme Court; Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo is one of the most significant religion cases in the past 30 years”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Tim O’Brien, ABC News journalist who covered Supreme Court, dies at 77”: Bart Barnes of The Washington Post has written this obituary.

And Mindy Wadley of Jacksonville, Florida’s First Coast News reports that “Victim in deadly Ponte Vedra bicycle crash identified as ABC News correspondent; Tim O’Brien’s family said he was an ABC News correspondent for more than 20 years; They bought a home in NE Florida, where he loved cycling daily after retiring.”