“Biden gains 3rd Circuit vacancy with Greenaway’s retirement”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report.

“Cert Grant on Preserving Issues via Denied Summary-Judgment Motions; The Supreme Court will finally decide whether a denied summary-judgment motion preserves purely legal issues for appeal”: Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog, along with a post titled “New Cert Petition on Reviewing Hardship Determinations in Immigration Appeals; The courts of appeals have split over whether they can review hardship determinations in immigration appeals; A new cert petition would let the Supreme Court weigh in.”

“From Lawyer To Judge And Back Again: An Interview With Gary Feinerman; Why did Judge Feinerman leave the bench, and what are his plans at Latham & Watkins?” You can access the new episode of David Lat’s “Original Jurisdiction” podcast via this link.

“Professor Xiao Wang in the Minnesota Law Review Refutes A Position I Do Not Hold; When you say someone is wrong, quote them, to ensure you are properly attributing their view”: Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“DOJ says end of health emergency will terminate Title 42 policy and moot Supreme Court case; The Tuesday submission comes just a week after the administration formally announced its plan to end the public health emergency”: Myah Ward of Politico has this report.

“Florida state court system, US, EU universities hit by ransomware outbreak”: James Pearson and Raphael Satter of Reuters have a report that begins, “A global ransomware outbreak has scrambled servers belonging to Florida’s Supreme Court and several universities in the United States and Central Europe, according to a Reuters analysis of ransom notes posted online to stricken servers.”

“Symposium To Look at Reclaiming Reproductive Rights After Dobbs”: Mike Fox of the University of Virginia School of Law has this report.

“Joseph Greenaway to Retire from Third Circuit Appeals Court”: Tiana Headley of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Roberts Tries to Stay Above Fray as High Court’s Standing Falls”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson and Lydia Wheeler of Bloomberg Law have this report.

“This Is Biden’s Chance to Tell Us Exactly What the Supreme Court Has Done”: Law professor Kate Shaw has this guest essay online at The New York Times.

“From nodding off to spouting off: How the Supreme Court can make news at the State of the Union.” John Fritze of USA Today has this report.

Received in today’s mail: An advance copy of the forthcoming book “Scalia: Rise to Greatness, 1936 to 1986” by James Rosen, which has an official publication date of March 2023. The book is the opening installment in a two-volume biography.

“Roberts Court Jurisprudence: What Was and What Will Come.” Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“Religious Carveout Push at Fifth Circuit Threatens Bostock‘s Scope”: Khorri Atkinson of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access).

Once the Fifth Circuit posts archived audio of the oral argument, I will link to it.

“Fears mount around ‘catastrophic’ abortion pills case as decision nears; Conservative judges likely to decide fate of Texas lawsuit seeking to ban mifepristone nationwide”: Caroline Kitchener and Perry Stein of The Washington Post have this report.

And in commentary, online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have a jurisprudence essay titled “Dobbs Was Always Just the Beginning; A single judge could outlaw the abortion pill nationwide; And that’s not even the worst of it.”

“Lawyers for U.S., Navy Seals battle over revoked Covid-19 vaccine mandate; 5th Circuit hears arguments on whether to wipe out injunctions against policy Congress overturned last year over Biden’s objection”: Josh Gerstein of Politico has this report on an oral argument (access the audio via this link) that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard today.

Third Circuit extends until March 3, 2023 comment period for proposed rule change that would establish 5 p.m. eastern deadline for electronic filing: The newly announced deadline can be accessed here. The original deadline for comment had been February 18, 2023.

“Federal judge says constitutional right to abortion may still exist, despite Dobbs; The judge said the Supreme Court’s ruling concluded only that the 14th Amendment included no right to abortion, but stopped short of definitively ruling out other aspects of the Constitution”: Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein of Politico have this report.

And Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Federal judge suggests national right to abortion exists after Supreme Court ruling; Clinton appointee questions whether 13th Amendment protects national right to abortion.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia at this link.

“A Federal Judiciary Without Labor Lawyers Is a Failure; Oral argument in Glacier Northwest provided a stark reminder of the weaknesses of a Supreme Court with no justices with union-side labor law experience”: Jenny Hunter has this post at Balls and Strikes.

“How Dobbs made the Wisconsin Supreme Court race one of the biggest elections of 2023; The state’s women-dominated Supreme Court will have the final say on abortion access in the state — and the race could come down to two women judges”: Grace Panetta of The 19th has this report.

“Federalist Society notebook: Consistency of judicial views a bonus for Florida Supreme Court, says Chief Justice Carlos Muniz.” Wes Wolfe of Florida Politics has this report.

“Is Cy Pres Defensible?” The Federalist Society recently posted this video on YouTube.

“It’s Time to Enact a 3-Judge Court Law for National Injunctions”: Law professor Alan Morrison has this essay online at Bloomberg Law.

“We don’t need any new ideas to fix the Supreme Court. Just one very old one. At least five members of the Supreme Court are comfortable ignoring the court’s past decisions and manipulating the law to achieve more conservative goals.” Columnist Jessica Levinson has this essay online at MSNBC.

“Dershowitz’s Bad Idea to Plug the Dobbs Leak; Journalists have repeatedly been willing to risk jail to protect the identity of their sources”: The Wall Street Journal has published this letter to the editor from Floyd Abrams.

“How to Stop a Senator From Blocking a Federal Judge”: The New York Times has published this editorial.

“Unfortunately, the Biggest Election Case of the Supreme Court Term Could Be Moot”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Brett Kavanaugh May Have Quietly Sabotaged Clarence Thomas’ Extreme Gun Ruling”: Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Implementing Bruen: The historical-practice standard established by last year’s landmark gun-rights case is proving to be manipulable in the lower courts.” Randy E. Barnett and Nelson Lund have this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“The Engagement: America’s Quarter-Century Struggle Over Same-Sex Marriage.” You can access today’s new episode of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast via this link.

“Forum Shopping in California; Just leave your heart, and nationwide injunction, in San Francisco”: Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Ye olde Supreme Court? Your originalism is making America unsafe.” Columnist Ruth Marcus has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“The Road to a Supreme Court Clerkship Starts at Three Ivy League Colleges; The chances of obtaining a coveted clerkship, a new study found, increase sharply with undergraduate degrees from Harvard, Yale or Princeton”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“13. Bruen’s Increasingly Troubling Aftermath: Everyone agrees that the Supreme Court upended Second Amendment jurisprudence last June. Just how far the majority’s new approach goes is something the Justices will soon need to clarify.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“On North Carolina’s Supreme Court, G.O.P. Justices Move to Reconsider Democratic Rulings; The court’s new majority will rehear two major voting rights cases decided two months ago; The rare move heightens the debate over partisan influences on state courts”: Michael Wines of The New York Times has this report.