“Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Harvard ties raise recusal questions in Supreme Court’s affirmative action case”: Ann E. Marimow and Seung Min Kim of The Washington Post have this report.

United Airlines asks the Fifth Circuit to vacate the divided three-judge panel’s opinion and dismiss as moot the case challenging the company’s placement of unvaccinated employees with religious exemptions on unpaid leave: You can access the company’s motion, filed this morning, at this link.

Today’s motion follows on the heels of yesterday’s news that United would now be allowing these employees to return to work.

“United Airlines to Let Unvaccinated Workers Return; Carrier to allow back employees on unpaid leave or in non-customer-facing roles who got religious or medical exemptions from Covid-19 vaccine mandate”: Alison Sider of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

It will be interesting to see if this announcement will have any effect on a certain Fifth Circuit case that is now pending on petition for rehearing en banc. The plaintiffs on Monday filed their response in opposition to the rehearing petition, after being directed to do so by the Fifth Circuit.

“This Sedative Is Now a Go-To Drug for Executions. But Does It Work? A legal battle in Oklahoma over whether prisoners feel severe pain after being given the sedative, midazolam, will determine whether its use is constitutional.” Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“White House set to stay in Supreme Court suspense until after KBJ’s hearings; Sen. Susan Collins, the most likely aisle-crossing vote for President Joe Biden’s high court pick, is steering clear of telegraphing her intentions”: Marianne LeVine of Politico has this report.

“Divided court explains choice of new congressional map”: Mark Scolforo of The Associated Press has this report on the opinions that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued today.

Pennsylvania’s highest court issued a majority opinion, three concurring opinions (here, here, and here), and three dissenting opinions (here, here, and here).

View online this year’s Sumner Canary Memorial Lecture featuring D.C. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao: The Case Western Reserve University School of Law has posted the video on YouTube at this link.

“Masterpiece Cakeshop Redux and the Homophobia Exemption from Anti-Discrimination Law”: Law professor Sherry F. Colb has this essay online at Justia’s Verdict.

And at “Dorf on Law,” Colb has a blog post titled “Why the Affirmative Action Cases Next Term Are Important.”

“Court revives suits seeking refunds after GWU, American moved online in pandemic”: Lauren Lumpkin has this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

Josh Gerstein of Politico reports that “Appeals court revives tuition-refund lawsuits against AU & GWU; Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson bows out of ruling on fallout from Covid-related college closures.”

Brian Flood of Bloomberg Law reports that “American University, GWU See Covid Tuition Lawsuits Revived.”

And Mychael Schnell of The Hill reports that “Appeals court restores lawsuits seeking coronavirus tuition refunds.”

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

“Textiness in Statutory Interpretation”: Rick Hills has this post at “PrawfsBlawg.”

“A front-row seat to history: 45 years inside the Supreme Court; Longtime sketch artist Art Lien will retire at the end of the Court’s current term.” Adam Longo of Washington, DC’s WUSA 9 has this report.

“GOP pushes for an ‘earthquake in American electoral power’; Conservatives are promoting the ‘independent legislature’ theory, which would hand vast election powers to GOP legislators in battleground states”: Zach Montellaro of Politico has this report.

And in commentary, today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal contains an editorial titled “The Supreme Court’s Elections Docket: The Justices can’t duck forever on state courts and gerrymanders.”

“The Alarming Legal Strategy Behind a SCOTUS Case That Could Undo Decades of Civil Rights Protections”: Law professor Hila Keren has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“How Supreme Court Radicalism Could Threaten Democracy Itself”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen — founder of the “Election Law Blog” — has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

And online at The New York Times, Hasen has a guest essay titled “How to Keep the Rising Tide of Fake News From Drowning Our Democracy.”

“Why All Nine Justices Overturned a Ludicrously Cruel Prison Sentence: Wooden v. United States shows the Supreme Court at its best — and throws its usual dysfunction into sharp relief.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Perhaps Ninth Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke can accurately predict the future: Nate Raymond of Reuters has a report headlined “California county’s pandemic gun store closures get new review by 9th Circuit” about an order granting rehearing en banc that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

And Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Court will reconsider gun case after Trump appointee predicted his ruling would be overturned.”

This was the case in which Judge VanDyke took the absolutely bonkers step of issuing a concurring opinion that consisted of his attempt to write the en banc decision reversing his opinion for the three-judge panel, replete with footnotes criticizing his Ninth Circuit colleagues for their approach to Second Amendment cases.

My earlier coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling in this case can be accessed here and here (among other places).

“Should Courts Stop Using ‘Substantive’ Canons of Construction? A proposal from Justice Kagan.” Will Baude has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Panel rejects South Carolina bid to kick Planned Parenthood off Medicaid program; Planned Parenthood South Atlantic can stay on the Palmetto State’s list of approved Medicaid providers, a federal appeals court ruled”: Erika Williams of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued today.

“Pa. Supreme Court weighs future of state’s popular mail voting law”: Angela Couloumbis of Spotlight PA has this report.

Jonathan Bergmueller of The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania reports that “Pa. Supreme Court mulls decision after 3 hours of arguments over no-excuse, mail-in voting.”

And Mark Scolforo of The Associated Press reports that “Justices ponder bid to throw out no-excuse mail-in balloting.”

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has posted the audio of today’s oral arguments on YouTube at this link.

“What Kind of Justice Will We Get With Ketanji Brown Jackson? She should be asked at her Supreme Court confirmation hearings about her views on crime and if Democratic efforts have harmed public safety.” Columnist Jason L. Riley will have this op-ed in Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Ghislaine Maxwell Juror Says He ‘Didn’t Lie’ to Get on Jury; The man’s statements to the news media after Ms. Maxwell’s conviction have clouded the guilty verdict in the case”: Benjamin Weiser and Rebecca Davis O’Brien of The New York Times have this report.

Shayna Jacobs of The Washington Post reports that “Maxwell juror who omitted history of sexual abuse in screening calls error ‘one of the biggest mistakes’ of his life; Man’s failure to disclose being abused as a child could result in the conviction being thrown out and a new trial being ordered.”

Josh Russell of Courthouse News Service reports that “Juror admission could trigger retrial for Ghislaine Maxwell; A New Yorker who failed to disclose childhood sexual abuse during jury selection for the sex-trafficking trial of Ghislaine Maxwell told a judge on Tuesday that he ‘completely skimmed way too fast’ a questionnaire that put him on the panel.”

And in commentary, online at NBC News, Andrey Spektor and Lindsay Gerdes have an essay titled “The Ghislaine Maxwell case is bringing the ‘Runaway Jury’ to life; John Grisham’s fictional narrative has startling parallels to Maxwell’s real-life trial after a juror’s stunning disclosure.”

“Susan Collins signals Biden Supreme Court pick could win her vote after ‘productive’ meeting”: Clare Foran and Manu Raju of CNN have this report.

“The needlessly complicated Supreme Court fight over whether Navy SEALs have to obey orders; Republican judges appear unwilling to acknowledge that they do not command the United States military”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Biden administration asks Fifth Circuit to reinstate vaccine mandate for federal employees; The government claims the case turns on who should decide if a vaccine requirement is needed for federal workers: a district judge with no public health expertise or the president, informed by public health experts.” Cameron Langford of Courthouse News Service has this report on an oral argument (access the archived audio via this link) that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard today.

“Just the Stats: Ketanji Brown Jackson as a District Court Judge.” Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

The “Law & Liberty” blog has posted two reviews of law professor Benjamin H. Barton‘s new book, “The Credentialed Court: Inside the Cloistered, Elite World of American Justice.” Law professor Glenn Reynolds‘s review is titled “The Age of the Judicial Thoroughbred: The Supreme Court has become far less interesting as it has become more standardized and winnowed.”

And Mark Pulliam has a review titled “Ivy League Justice: The current Supreme Court, while superficially diverse in terms of race, sex, and ethnicity, displays remarkable homogeneity.”

“Honking during a protest is illegal. An appeals court will decide if the law violates free speech.” In today’s edition of The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has this article reporting on an oral argument (access the YouTube video via this link) that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard yesterday.

“Supreme Court Allows Court-Imposed Voting Maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania; State courts had ruled that earlier maps for congressional elections had been warped by partisan gerrymandering; Democrats stand to benefit from the justices’ decision”: Adam Liptak will have this article in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

In commentary, online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court Just Came Perilously Close to Blowing Up Federal Elections.”

And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “A grand Supreme Court showdown over gerrymandering ends in a whimper; Republicans face a significant, but temporary, defeat in the Supreme Court.”

You can access here and here today’s orders of the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Pentagon heads to Supreme Court to stop deployment of unvaccinated Navy SEALs; The government claims a lower court seriously overstepped its bounds by intruding into core military affairs”: Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service has this report on an application for partial stay that the federal government filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court.

“U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear bid to reinstate Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction; The high court’s decision not to take up the case effectively ends a nearly two-decade legal saga for the 84-year-old comedian that briefly saw him incarcerated for a 2004 crime”: Jeremy Roebuck of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report.

“[W]hat happens if a state court grants the preliminary injunction, and a defendant then removes the case to federal court? Does the right to an early appeal of an injunction order cover the state court’s order too?” A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit answers that question “no” in an opinion issued today.

“Conservative Judges Have Mastered the Art of Running Out the Clock; With six conservative justices willing to sit on their hands and do nothing, lower court judges know they can get away with basically anything”: Lisa Needham has this post at Balls and Strikes.

“Appellate Law Podcasts That Are Worth a Listen: Not surprisingly, appellate law and practice, and the U.S. Supreme Court in particular, are the subject of a burgeoning number of podcasts.” This month’s installment of my “Upon Further Review” column will appear in tomorrow’s print edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia’s daily newspaper for lawyers.

“Lawmakers may change how Kansas Supreme Court justices are picked as redistricting case looms”: Andrew Bahl of The Topeka Capital-Journal has this report.

“Amy Coney Barrett Was a ‘Supermom.’ So Is Ketanji Brown Jackson.” Law professor Melissa Murray has this guest essay online at The New York Times.