“Mifepristone and the rule of law: The plaintiffs’ case to take mifepristone off the market is weak and likely to fail.” Adam Unikowsky has this post at his Substack site, “Adam’s Legal Newsletter.”
Online at Slate, law professors David S. Cohen, Greer Donley, and Rachel Rebouche have a jurisprudence essay titled “Actually, One Texas Judge Is Not the Final Decision-Maker on Medication Abortion; One district judge’s ruling does not have to affect the entire country.”
And at Balls and Strikes, Jacob Hammond has a post titled “The Fringe Legal Theory Powering the Conservative War On Abortion Pills; How the right is trying to revive an obscure 150-year-old federal obscenity law to continue peeling back reproductive rights.”
“Bar associations oppose U.S. appeals court ending midnight filings”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report. The article provides access (here and here) to two group comments in which I have joined opposing the rule change, and I separately submitted this comment in opposition on my own.
“Supreme Court asks for more briefings in major voting rights case in North Carolina”: Ariane de Vogue and Devan Cole of CNN have this report.
Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “US Supreme Court indicates it may sidestep major elections ruling.”
Paul Blumenthal of HuffPost reports that “Supreme Court Signals It May Avoid Ruling In Blockbuster Independent State Legislature Case; The court is asking for new briefs after the North Carolina Supreme Court granted a rehearing in the underlying case.”
And at the “Election Law Blog,” Derek Muller has a post titled “‘Final judgment,’ not mootness, at issue in latest Moore v. Harper twist.”
You can access yesterday’s order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.