“A Sixth Circuit Split on Appeals After Voluntary Dismissals; The Sixth Circuit dismissed an appeal when the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her unresolved claims without prejudice; But the court avoided a finality trap”: Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog about a decision that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued yesterday.

“As Supreme Court Weighs Harvard Admissions Case, Two Asian Americans Speak Out And Allege Bias”: Kirk Carapezza of GBH News has this report.

“The Stephen Breyer Backfire: Efforts to bully him into retirement may end up having the opposite effect.” Columnist Kimberley A. Strassel will have this op-ed in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Instagram is counting on controversial copyright test to save its image(s)”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post.

“Shadow Docket 2020-2021”: Adam Feldman has this post at The Juris Lab.

“Will the Court Tame the Administrative State? This term showed substantial, if still only incremental, progress in taming the administrative state and cabining its scope.” John O. McGinnis has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Federal Courts Keep Shooting Down Anti-Trans Laws. Will That Hold at SCOTUS?” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Mississippi asks the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report on the Brief for Petitioners that the State of Mississippi filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Details on F.B.I. Inquiry Into Kavanaugh Draw Fire From Democrats; The F.B.I. said some of the 4,500 tips it received about Justice Brett Kavanaugh were given to the Trump White House, leading some Democrats to call the process a sham”: Kate Kelly of The New York Times has this report.

“As 7th Anniversary of Dan Markel’s Murder Passes, His Parents Still Hope To Reunite With Their Grandchildren”: Robbie Gaffney of WFSU has this report.

“The federal judiciary need not accept a prisoner’s self-diagnosed skepticism about the COVID-19 vaccines as an adequate explanation for remaining unvaccinated, when the responsible agencies all deem vaccination safe and effective.”: So explained Circuit Judge Frank H. Easterbrook in an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

Fourth Circuit panel divides over whether Shady Grove excuses a Federal Tort Claims Act claimant from having to comply with West Virginia’s certificate of merit requirement for a medical negligence claim: You can access yesterday’s ruling of a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“No More ‘Parker Immunity’ Appeals in the Eleventh Circuit; The en banc Eleventh Circuit overruled its precedent allowing appeals from rejections of antitrust’s state-action defense, which is often called Parker immunity”: Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog.

My earlier coverage of Tuesday’s en banc Eleventh Circuit ruling can be accessed here.

“10th Circuit Rejects Qualified Immunity Defense In Suit By Native American Inmates”: Howard Friedman has this post at his “Religion Clause” blog about a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued yesterday.

“In Nearly All Other Democracies, This Is Not Normal”: Law professor Richard H. Pildes has this guest essay in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“U.S. Won’t Seek Death Penalty in 7 Cases, Signaling a Shift Under Biden; The decision not to seek the death penalty in federal cases around the country has raised defense lawyers’ hopes that the administration may end the practice”: Benjamin Weiser and Hailey Fuchs of The New York Times have this report.

“A Rule Against Fun”: At the “Jotwell” blog, Richard Re reviews law professor Nina Varsava‘s forthcoming law review article, titled “Professional Irresponsibility and Judicial Opinions,” in a post that begins:

In recent months, federal judicial opinions have criticized “schlocky Star Wars sequels” or called circuit case law “a hot mess.” They have fondly recalled “[w]hen painter-turned-inventor Samuel Morse sent the first telegraph message” or sarcastically used expressions like “presto!” or “voila.” And they have sustained decades-long criminal sentences by writing: “tl;dr . . . . we affirm the whole kit and caboodle.” In different ways, these opinions are having a bit of fun. And what could be wrong with that?