“What We Can Deduce From A Leaked PDF”: Matthew Butterick has this blog post.

Tomorrow will mark the 20th birthday of the “How Appealing” blog: My inaugural post appeared here at 9:35 a.m. on Monday, May 6, 2002.

“Chief Justice Roberts says Supreme Court leak won’t alter deliberations”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

“Law enforcement officials brace for potential violence around SCOTUS draft opinion; More than 150 officials nationwide joined a coordination call to prepare for possible violent attacks”: Betsy Woodruff Swan of Politico has this report.

“Chief Justice Says Supreme Court Leak ‘Absolutely Appalling’; Disclosure won’t affect handling of case, John Roberts said; Roberts makes comments at a judicial conference in Atlanta”: Greg Farrell and Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News have this report.

“Search begins for next FL Supreme Court justice: Hot-button cases wait in the wings; High court likely will face redistricting, abortion, other pivotal cases.” Michael Moline of Florida Phoenix has this report.

“Why did federal police square off with abortion rights protesters in L.A. streets?” Kevin Rector of The Los Angeles Times has this report.

“Next battle over access to abortion will focus on pills”: Stephen Groves of The Associated Press has this report.

“How the Supreme Court could proceed with the Roe leak probe: The Justice Department is not planning to get involved for now, meaning the marshal of the court would be left to her own devices.” Pete Williams of NBC News has this report.

“The Supreme Court Has Always Been Political; A leaked draft of an abortion ruling has some decrying the high court’s partisanship; But the justices have always had their own agendas”: Law professor Stephen L. Carter has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“The Mississippi clinic at the center of the Supreme Court case is still open”: Rick Rojas has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“John Roberts calls Supreme Court leak ‘absolutely appalling'”: Ariane de Vogue and Maria Cartaya of CNN have this report.

“Softer language post-leak? Maybe, says Tribe, but ruling will remain an ‘iron fist.’ Scholar of constitutional law discusses immediate, future implications of breach revealing SCOTUS decision that would overturn Roe.” Colleen Walsh of The Harvard Gazette has this report.

“The brazenly political Supreme Court shows it will strike down abortion rights”: Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky recently had this essay online at The Los Angeles Times.

And online at The San Francisco Chronicle, Chemerinsky has an essay titled “Guns, prayer and marriage equality: How the Supreme Court is about to change life in California; Roe v. Wade is just the start; Prop 8, which outlawed same-sex marriage, could soon be back on California’s books.”

“The Alito opinion would be like Plessy overturning Brown v. Board of Education”: David Cole has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Abortion pills by mail pose challenge for officials in red states; Remote prescribing and overseas generics are among options as women manage their abortions”: Christopher Rowland, Laurie McGinley, and Jacob Bogage have this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

“Liberal group calls for protests at conservative Supreme Court justices’ homes; Group says they will visit the homes on May 11”: Anders Hagstrom of Fox News has this report.

“Roe leak may impact how Supreme Court decides gun rights, climate and immigration cases this spring”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.

“Supreme Court Hunt for Who Leaked Draft Roe v. Wade Opinion Has No Road Map; Marshal running the probe has untested investigative powers, and the leak might not be a crime”: Sadie Gurman of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Why the Dobbs Leak Is Dangerous”: Mark Movsesian has this essay online at First Things.

“Will Dobbs Be a Ticket Good for this Right Only? What the Alito draft tells us about a possible future for same-sex marriage.” Dale Carpenter has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Why the Supreme Court’s Leak Investigation Is a Sham: The institution’s certainty in the sanctity of its own norms is blowing up in its face.” Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The leak shows why abortion policy should be returned to the states”: Law professor O. Carter Snead has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Beware the Feminism of Justice Alito”: Emily Bazelon has this essay online at The New York Times.

“It’s Chief Justice Roberts’ Court, but does he still lead?” Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press has this report.

“Putting Together the Pieces on The Campaign to Stop Roberts”: Josh Marshall has this post at TPM.

“Politico scoop on Supreme Court draft opinion triggers media intrigue; A guessing game erupts over who leaked the confidential Alito draft that suggests the court has voted to overturn Roe v. Wade”: Paul Farhi and Jeremy Barr of The Washington Post have this report.

“How the leak might have happened”: Tom Goldstein has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“The Abortion Disinformation Campaign: Don’t believe the claims that other rights are in jeopardy if Roe v. Wade falls.” This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

And online at Bloomberg Opinion, Ramesh Ponnuru has an essay titled “What’s Not Going to Happen After Roe Falls: Abortion isn’t going to be banned nationally, and major Supreme Court precedents on contraception and gay rights are safe.”

“Marshal Law”: You can access yesterday’s new episode of the “Divided Argument” podcast, featuring law professors Will Baude and Dan Epps, via this link.

“U.S. Supreme Court’s Alito cancels conference appearance after abortion ruling leak”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report.

“Military Can Help On Immigration Enforcement, 9th Circ. Says”: Ivan Moreno of Law360 has this report (subscription required for access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday rejecting the defendant’s Posse Comitatus Act challenge.

Another Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 offer of judgment accepted in the nick of time: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued this decision yesterday.

“Judge Orders New Trial for Gigi Jordan in Son’s Killing; Ms. Jordan was found guilty of manslaughter for poisoning her 8-year-old son, but a federal judge ruled that her right to a public trial had been violated”: Daniel E. Slotnik of The New York Times had this report back in September 2020.

Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a decision reversing the new trial order, thereby reinstating the state court conviction.

“Songwriter’s heirs can’t reclaim rights to Elvis hit, judge rules”: Blake Brittain of Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued yesterday.