“Sam Alito Is Pushing a Dangerous Myth About Abortion and Eugenics; When history does not comport with the conservative legal movement’s extremist policy goals, conservatives are liable to just make some history up”: Adam Cohen has this post at Balls and Strikes.

“With Roe on the rocks, the Roberts court exists in name only; The chief justice who has long urged associates to call balls and strikes is increasingly losing sway in an era of justices wanting to pitch and bat”: Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service has this report.

“We Should Tell The Truth About Judicial Clerkships; While law schools are currently part of the problem, they can be part of the solution”: Aliza Shatzman has this post at “Above the Law.”

“Inconveniencing Brett Kavanaugh Right Now Is Good, Actually”: Emma Specter has this essay online at Vogue.

“The Horrifying Implications of Alito’s Most Alarming Footnote; A ‘domestic supply of infants’ is exactly what the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment intended to abolish”: Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“These GOP politicians aren’t pro-life. They’re pro-forced birth.” Columnist Catherine Rampell has this essay online at The Washington Post.

Also online there, columnist Jennifer Rubin has an essay titled “Criminalizing abortion: Cue the enforcement nightmare.”

“Protesting at justices’ homes is illegal. What is Biden doing about it?” Columnist Marc A. Thiessen has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Legal Reasoning Can’t Settle Abortion-Rights Fight; Roe v. Wade has serious analytical weaknesses; So does Justice Samuel Alito’s attack on it; No constitutional theory is sturdy enough to persuade both sides”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“If Roe is overturned, it might mark the first time the Supreme Court declared an individual right, then took it back”: Bob Egelko has this front page article in today’s edition of The San Francisco Chronicle.

“That 13th-century law treatise Alito uses? Here’s what else it says.” Columnist Dana Milbank has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

Also in today’s edition of that newspaper, law professor Jill Elaine Hasday has an op-ed headlined “On Roe, Alito cites a judge who treated women as witches and property.”

“Louisiana reveals the war on rights that is coming if Roe is overturned”: The Washington Post has published this editorial.

“Security tightened for Supreme Court justices as protests extend to Alito’s home; GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell compared the demonstrations to ‘the rule of mobs'”: Libby Cathey of ABC News has this report.

“Abortion and the Free Exercise Clause: What if a doctor feels a religious obligation to perform abortions, (e.g., because he believes doing so is necessary for him to be the Good Samaritan, by removing a threat to his patient’s mental health)?” Eugene Volokh has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Don’t be surprised when Supreme Court comes for interracial marriage”: Columnist Michelle Deal-Zimmerman has this essay online at The Baltimore Sun.

“Brett Kavanaugh is not in danger — unlike the abortion precedent he’s ready to overturn; A vigil outside Kavanaugh’s house led to predictable pearl-clutching; But a country in which the powerful can seize rights without even nonviolent protest is not a democracy”: Noah Berlatsky has this essay online at NBC News.

“Texas asks Fifth Circuit to reinstate social media law; A panel of federal appeals judges heard arguments in a case challenging a Texas law that regulates the ability of social media sites to remove content or users”: Sabrina Canfield of Courthouse News Service has this report.

And Paul DeBenedetto of Houston Public Media reports that “Texas argues Facebook and Twitter are a ‘modern-day public square’ in defense of censorship law; Lawyers for the social media companies say the law, HB 20, is an infringement on their First Amendment rights.”

You can access via this link the audio of yesterday’s oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

“With high court in spotlight, Democrats push judicial ethics overhaul; A draft proposal calls for more disclosure, a Supreme Court code of conduct and a new judicial recusal process”: Jacqueline Alemany of The Washington Post has this report.

“US bankruptcy law governs Indian tribes, 1st Circuit rules; The decision could carry liability for a Chippewa tribe accused of hounding a debtor into trying to kill himself”: Thomas F. Harrison of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued Friday, addressing an issue that was already the subject of a circuit split.

At the “Turtle Talk” blog, Matthew L.M. Fletcher has posted the briefs filed in the appeal.

“Was Politico’s Supreme Court Leaker an Inside Man? Four reasons why the media speculation may be overlooking a more mysterious culprit; Plus, what the legal fallout could mean for Julian Assange and James O’Keefe.” Eriq Gardner has this essay (subscription required for full access) online at Puck.