“Texas women drive hours for abortions after new law”: Sean Murphy of The Associated Press has this report.
Carter Sherman of Vice News has a report headlined “Here’s What It’s Like to Flee Texas and Drive 200 Miles for an Abortion; After being turned away from a Texas clinic, a 26-year-old mother went to Oklahoma for an abortion; We went with her.”
Caroline Kitchener of The Lilly has an article headlined “Abortion care is a ‘calling’ for this Texas doctor; Now he faces a dilemma: Risk lawsuits, or quit; Joe Nelson is weighing his options as courts weigh in on the nation’s strictest abortion ban.”
Natasha Lennard of The Intercept has an essay titled “What Else Biden Can — and Should — Do to Fight the Texas Abortion Ban; The judicial back-and-forth on the abortion law shows why the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Texas won’t be enough.”
And at The Daily Kos, Rebekah Sager reports that “Gov. Abbott stung by activist, caught on camera bragging about outlawing abortion in Texas.”
“The legal mind behind America’s most extreme abortion law; Former Texas solicitor general Jonathan F Mitchell’s ‘dangerous’ legal strategy lets legislators pass laws that thwart the judiciary”: Mary Tuma of The Guardian (UK) has this report.
“Texas urges appeals court to keep abortion ban in place as legal challenges play out”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report. You can access Texas’s reply at this link.
“Pennsylvania Supreme Court Announces Plans to Commemorate 300th Anniversary of the Court”: The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts issued this news release yesterday. Additional information about two forthcoming events scheduled for May 2022 can be accessed here.
“Sotomayor Laments Lack of Professional Diversity on High Court”: Jordan S. Rubin of Bloomberg Law has this report.
“Stephen Breyer says now isn’t the time to lose faith in the Supreme Court”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.
“A Surprise Amicus Brief in the Challenge to New York’s Gun Carry Ban; Former Judge Luttig’s arguments are off base”: Stephen Halbrook has this guest post at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” along with related guest posts titled “New York’s Futile Search for Historical Precedents for its Handgun Carry Restrictions; The Massachusetts Model was not a carry ban and required aggressive behavior before it applied” and “Does a Medieval English Statute Supersede the Second Amendment? New York takes a long shot at saving its firearm carry ban.”
“Korematsu as the Tribute that Vice Pays to Virtue”: Law professor Jack M. Balkin has posted this essay at SSRN.
The essay responds to law professor Mark R. Killenbeck‘s article, also available at SSRN, titled “Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered.”
“A Justice for All Seasons: Is Clarence Thomas the greatest originalist justice in the Court’s history?” John O. McGinnis and Mike Rappaport have this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.
“What if You Had Abortion Pills in Your Medicine Cabinet?” Patrick Adams will have this guest essay in Thursday’s edition of The New York Times.
“2021 Supreme Court Preview”: NYU School of Law has posted this video on YouTube. The participants include law professor Melissa Murray and Joan Biskupic of CNN.
“SCOTUS changed oral arguments in part because female justices were interrupted, Sotomayor says”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.
“Supreme Court Seems Ready to Restore Death Sentence for Boston Marathon Bomber; The Biden administration has pursued the case against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in spite of its own moratorium on capital punishment”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court seems poised to reinstate Boston Marathon bomber’s death sentence.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Justices Differ on Boston Bomber’s Death Sentence; Court hears arguments about whether procedural issues at Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s trial justified an appeal court’s setting aside his death sentence.”
John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court’s conservatives seem open to reinstating death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber.”
Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court weighs death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber.”
Shelley Murphy and Travis Andersen of The Boston Globe report that “Supreme Court hears arguments on reinstating the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.”
Marie Szaniszlo of The Boston Herald reports that “Supreme Court signals support to restore death penalty for convicted Boston Marathon bomber.”
Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Justices seem set to revive marathon bomber’s death sentence.”
Lawrence Hurley and Nate Raymond of Reuters report that “U.S. Supreme Court justices lean toward restoring Boston Marathon bomber’s death sentence.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Justices Hint at Death Penalty Reinstatement for Marathon Bomber.”
Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court appears likely to allow death sentence for Boston Marathon bomber; The Justice Department is defending Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s death sentence, which a federal appeals court overturned last year.”
Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court conservatives appear ready to endorse death sentence for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.”
Tyler Olson and Bill Mears of Fox News have reports headlined “Boston bomber: Barrett asks DOJ lawyer why Biden admin wants to reinstate death sentence amid execution pause; Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked, ‘What’s the government’s end game here?’” and “Boston Bomber case: Kavanaugh, Kagan clash in rare testy exchange over mitigating evidence; Kavanaugh criticized liberal justice’s line of questioning, prompting Kagan to fire back.”
John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court signals willingness to reinstate marathon bomber death sentence.”
Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service reports that “Feds said mention of unsolved murders would confuse marathon bomber’s jury; Could it also save his life? The Biden administration’s appeal to reinstate the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev comes even as it strings progressive voters along on a promise to end capital punishment in the U.S.”
And on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Supreme Court heard arguments in case about Boston Marathon bomber’s death sentence.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has posted online the transcript and audio of this morning’s oral argument in United States v. Tsarnaev, No. 20-443.
“Stephen Breyer’s Supreme Delusions; His new book refuses to recognize that the court is political”: Law professors Ryan D. Doerfler and Samuel Moyn have this review of Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s new book, “The Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics,” online at The New Republic.
In response to that review, at his “Re’s Judicata” blog, Richard M. Re has a post titled “Should Court Reformers Attack the Idea of Law?“
The State of Mississippi today filed its Reply Brief for Petitioners in the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. You can access the reply brief at this link. And you can access all the other briefs filed in the case via this link.
“White House commission on the Supreme Court to release draft materials Thursday”: Maegan Vazquez and Allie Malloy of CNN have this report.
“Supreme Court declines to hear Philly’s supervised injection site case; The justices turned down a petition to hear arguments that federal law was not intended to criminalize the opening of sites where people in addiction could use drugs under medical supervision”: Aubrey Whelan and Jeremy Roebuck of The Philadelphia Inquirer have this report.
“Katie Couric covered up RBG’s dislike for taking the knee: Anchor says she edited 2016 interview to ‘protect’ the justice after she said people who kneel are showing ‘contempt for a government that made a decent life possible.'” Daniel Bates of The Daily Mail (UK) has this report.
And Hannah Frishberg of The New York Post has an article headlined “Katie Couric: I withheld RBG’s harsh anthem-kneeling comments to ‘protect’ her.”
“Congress’s Anti-Removal Power”: Law professors Aaron L. Nielson and Christopher J. Walker have posted this article at SSRN. The article arises out of their work together on a U.S. Supreme Court-appointed amicus brief in Collins v. Yellen.
“Pennsylvania’s Appellate Courts Have Their Own Shadow Dockets”: Yesterday, this month’s installment of my “Upon Further Review” column appeared in The Legal Intelligencer, Pennsylvania’s daily newspaper for lawyers.
“First Questioner: Justice Clarence Thomas has asked the first question of 10 of 11 lawyers at the lectern so far.” Tony Mauro has this post at his “The Marble Palace Blog.”
“Court fight over Texas abortion restriction tests limits of state laws”: Harper Neidig of The Hill has this report.
“A Brief History of Stephen Breyer Enabling Corporate Power: Over the course of his career, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer has played a key role in the rise of monopoly and oligopoly across the economy.” Sandeep Vaheesan has this post at Balls and Strikes.
“Maybe Supreme Court Judges Really Are Driven by Politics; How conservative jurists only approve state restrictions over individual freedoms when it suits their purposes”: Law professor Joshua Douglas has this essay online at Washington Monthly.
“Stephen Miller Brings His Trumpist Crusade to the Courts; America First Legal, Miller’s right-wing answer to the ACLU, is suing the Biden administration over immigration and relief for Black farmers”: Erik Larson of Bloomberg Businessweek has this report.
“Supreme Court to hear arguments on reinstating the death penalty for convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev”: Shelley Murphy of The Boston Globe has this report on a case being argued this morning at the U.S. Supreme Court.
You can listen live, online to the oral argument audio via this link.
“Unsolved Murdaugh Murders Expose Years of South Carolina Mysteries; Alex Murdaugh, the powerful lawyer who asked a handyman to kill him, had a spectacular fall from grace; Five people in his family’s orbit have died in recent years, and investigators are looking for connections”: Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs and Richard Fausset of The New York Times have this report.
“The Mississippi Abortion Case Threatens the Right to Use Birth Control, Marry, and Even Make Choices About Sex”: David H. Gans has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“Justices Seem Ready to Let Kentucky’s Attorney General Defend Abortion Law; After the state’s political landscape shifted in 2019, the Democratic governor and the Republican attorney general disagreed on defending the law”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court seems willing to let Kentucky attorney general pick up defense of abortion law.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Considers Reviving Appeal of Kentucky Abortion Law; Case centers on right of state’s Republican attorney general to pursue defense of law limiting abortion after the Democratic governor stood back from further appeals.”
John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court signals willingness to allow Kentucky attorney general to defend state’s abortion law.”
Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Justices weigh Kentucky abortion law as GOP attorney general moves to revive restrictions.”
David Catanese of McClatchy DC reports that “Supreme Court considers whether Cameron can fight for Kentucky abortion restriction.”
Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court could OK new defense of Kentucky abortion law.”
Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court leans toward letting Kentucky official defend abortion law.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Suggests Kentucky Official Can Defend Abortion Curbs.”
Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court appears willing to let Kentucky attorney general defend state abortion law; If he prevails, Attorney General Daniel Cameron could ask a federal appeals court to consider the constitutionality of the law, which was struck down in 2019, before he was elected.”
Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court seems open to letting Kentucky attorney general defend abortion law.”
John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court considers Kentucky AG’s power to defend abortion restriction.”
And Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service reports that “Fight to limit abortion access in Kentucky focuses on AG’s standing; Kentucky’s Republican attorney general wants to enforce a law prohibiting the most common form of second-trimester abortion after the policy fell apart when the state elected a Democratic governor in 2019.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has posted online the transcript and audio of today’s oral argument in Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center, No. 20-601.
“Shame on Texas: Playing Ping-Pong with the Lives of Pregnant People.” Law professor Joanna L. Grossman has this essay online at Justia’s Verdict.
“2021 Supreme Court Preview [Jacksonville Lawyers Chapter]”: The Federalist Society has posted this video on YouTube.
“By Attacking Me, Justice Alito Proved My Point; If he wants the public to see the Court as apolitical, he should try meeting that standard himself”: Adam Serwer has this essay online at The Atlantic.
“Trump’s use of executive privilege will test congressional power to enforce subpoenas; Congress could try to convince the Justice Department to file criminal charges against those who ignore its demands”: Pete Williams of NBC News has this report.
“Supreme Court Asks U.S. to Weigh in on Epic Trade Secrets Appeal”: Kyle Jahner of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access).
And Alex Wolf of Bloomberg Law reports that “Supreme Court Skips Look at Bankruptcy Appeal Blocking Doctrine” (subscription required for full access).
“Justices’ views on abortion in their own words and votes”: Mark Sherman and Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press have this report.
