Interviews recently posted online at the “High School SCOTUS” blog: Anna Salvatore has recently posted her interview of Seth Waxman from 2019.

And Elise Spenner has posted this interview of Sarah Harris.

“Biden’s fight to de-Trumpify the courts, explained; Biden is the president liberal court watchers have been waiting for, but he may be five years too late”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Lessons from the pandemic: Gains, losses and two suggestions for a new normal.” Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“Whose Court is it Now?” Michael C. Dorf has this post at his blog, “Dorf on Law.”

“‘Devastating’ Anxiety as Remote Bar Exam Tech Crashes Again”: Sam Skolnik of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Mississippi’s abortion brief dynamites standing law and ‘super duper’ precedents”: Columnist Harry Litman has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times.

“Has Roe v. Wade Met Its Match? The brief by Mississippi’s attorney general makes a surprising argument aimed at Chief Justice Roberts.” David J. Garrow will have this op-ed in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“The Supreme Court must affirm its own decision to broadcast oral arguments; Keeping in place a practice that has worked for the last year and a half could benefit justices who prefer self-imposed incremental change to statutory mandates”: The Boston Globe has published this editorial.

“Republicans Urge Supreme Court to Topple Roe, Slash Abortion Rights”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“The Courts Now Say a Teacher Who Puts a First Grader in a Chokehold Has Qualified Immunity”: Georgina Yeomans has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“11th Circuit strikes down Florida megachurch challenge to hate group label; An evangelical Christian ministry listed as an anti-LGBTQ hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center was not discriminated against when its application to fundraise through Amazon’s charitable website was denied, the court ruled”: Kayla Goggin of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“Ninth Circuit kills pork industry challenge to California confinement rules; The appeals court found California’s voter-approved animal confinement standards aren’t unconstitutional — even if they will dramatically impact the nation’s pork producers”: Bianca Bruno of Courthouse News Service has this report.

And Metropolitan News-Enterprise reports that “Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act Is Constitutional; Ikuta Says It Does Not Offend Dormant Commerce Clause Despite Pronounced Effect on Out-of-State Farmers.”

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

“Ninth Circuit Certification Trends”: M.C. Sungaila has this post at The Juris Lab.

“The Cosby Ruling: Some Legal Analysts Dispute the Court’s Reasoning; The court decision that reversed the sexual assault conviction of Bill Cosby has prompted an unusual level of legal debate about the appropriate parameters of appellate review.” Graham Bowley has this news analysis in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Mississippi Explains All on Abortion”: Columnist Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Biden urges Congress to extend eviction moratorium, saying his hands are tied by Supreme Court ruling”: John Wagner of The Washington Post has this report.

“What’s Behind the Conservative Rift on the Supreme Court: Many court watchers are still paying attention only to how liberal or conservative the justices are; But there’s another factor at work.” Sarah Isgur, co-host of the “Advisory Opinions” podcast, has this essay online at Politico Magazine.

“It Sure Looks Like Roe‘s Foes Noticed That Amy Coney Barrett Is on the Supreme Court; The plaintiffs in the next big abortion rights case quietly — and ominously — flipped their script to better suit the ideology of the new justice”: Matt Ford has this essay online at The New Republic.

“The New Moral Code of America’s Elite: Two students went to Amy Chua for advice. That sin would cost them dearly.” Elizabeth Bruenig of The Atlantic has this report.

“‘I sort of panicked.’ Tech problems hit remote bar exam.” Karen Sloan of Reuters has this report.

“The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform.” Steven Mazie has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“11th Circ. Revives Passengers’ Hurricane Harvey Cruise Suit”: Law360 has this report (subscription required for access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“Beef Ads Funded by Cattle Sale ‘Checkoffs’ Are Government Speech”: Jennifer Bennett of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

A Fifth Circuit decision in which the Prims were arrested for public intoxication: The district court’s ruling was not entirely proper, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in this decision issued yesterday.

“DC Circ. Says Turkey Can’t Duck Protester Abuse Suit”: Law360 has this report (subscription required for access) bearing a pun-filled headline about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued yesterday.

“U.S. Declines to Defend Trump Ally in Lawsuit Over Jan. 6 Riot; The move could mean that the Justice Department is also unlikely to defend former President Donald J. Trump in the case”: Katie Benner has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett and Rachel Weiner have an article headlined “Justice Dept: Republican Rep. Mo Brooks may be sued over Jan. 6 speech to Trump supporters.”

Sadie Gurman of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Justice Department Won’t Defend GOP Lawmaker Mo Brooks in Lawsuit Over Jan. 6 Riot; Department says congressman’s rally speech wasn’t an official function.”

Kevin Johnson of USA Today has an article headlined “DOJ: Rep. Mo Brooks should not be dismissed from Capitol riot lawsuit; actions not ‘within scope’ of duties.”

Pete Williams and Dartunorro Clark of NBC News report that “DOJ ruling represents legal setback for Rep. Mo Brooks in lawsuit over Jan. 6 speech; The Justice Department told a federal court Tuesday that Brooks, R-Ala., wasn’t acting in an official capacity when he spoke at Trump’s rally.”

Marshall Cohen and Tierney Sneed of CNN report that “DOJ won’t protect GOP Rep. Mo Brooks in insurrection lawsuit.”

Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein of Politico report that “Justice Department declines to defend Rep. Mo Brooks against Jan. 6 incitement lawsuit; The Alabama Republican is one of several defendants in the suit filed by Rep. Eric Swalwell, who says Brooks knowingly incited a mob of Trump supporters.”

Harper Neidig of The Hill reports that “DOJ declines to back Mo Brooks’s defense against Swalwell’s riot lawsuit.”

Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News reports that “The Justice Department Won’t Agree To Defend Rep. Mo Brooks Against Claims He Incited The Jan. 6 Riots; DOJ concluded the Alabama Republican was engaging in campaign activity at a Jan. 6 rally, and that’s not the US government’s business.”

Nick Visser of HuffPost reports that “U.S. Won’t Defend Rep. Mo Brooks For Speaking At Pro-Trump Rally On Jan. 6; The Department of Justice said the Alabama Republican’s speech before the Capitol attack was ‘not within the scope’ of his employment.”

And in commentary, online at The Washington Post, Norman Eisen and Donald Ayer have an essay titled “Merrick Garland is doing more to hold Trump accountable than it appears; Rejecting Mo Brooks’s request for immunization for Jan. 6 remarks underscores the attorney general’s approach.”

You can access last night’s filing of the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“Roe v. Wade Is Now in the Hands of the Three Trump Justices; Does that mean it might be safe?” Law professor David S. Cohen and Dahlia Lithwick have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court Job Approval Dips Below 50%”: Jeffrey M. Jones of Gallup News has this report.

“U.S. Supreme Court’s ‘shadow docket’ favored religion and Trump”: Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung of Reuters have this news analysis.

“The Florida Supreme Court and the ghost of Virgil Hawkins”: The South Florida Sun Sentinel has published this editorial.

“The courts are destroying America’s ability to fight pandemics; Public health crises require a dynamic government that makes quick decisions; GOP judges want to prevent that”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“2-1 Decision Holds Web Site Designer May Be Required to Design Site for Same-Sex Weddings”: Eugene Volokh has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about a 103-page ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Court rejects wrongful death suit while warning against out-of-state regulation of Colorado recreation”: Michael Karlik of Colorado Politics has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Gov. Stitt names Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Dana Lynn Kuehn to Oklahoma Supreme Court”: Chris Casteel of The Oklahoman has this report.

Yesterday, the office of Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt issued a news release titled “Governor Kevin Stitt Appoints Judge Dana L. Kuehn to The Supreme Court of Oklahoma.”

“Celina Sotomayor, mother of Supreme Court justice, dies at 94”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.