“Senate Democrats Plan to Subpoena Wealthy Figures Who Paid for Thomas’s and Alito’s Luxury Trips; Justices’ travel sponsors argue Congress has no power to require cooperation with Supreme Court ethics probe”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Supreme Court Weighs When Officials May Block Citizens on Social Media; The justices struggled to distinguish private conduct, which is not subject to the First Amendment, from state action, which is”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post reports that “High court struggles on whether officials may block social media critics; The Supreme Court will decide several cases this term that impact the future of free speech on social media platforms.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court asked to protect California school officials from critics on Facebook.”

Todd Spangler of The Detroit Free Press reports that “US Supreme Court hears arguments over Port Huron city manager’s Facebook page.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico has a report headlined “Can politicians block their critics on Twitter? Not always, Supreme Court suggests. The justices heard arguments on when a public official’s social media account becomes ‘state action’ under the First Amendment.”

And Mark Walsh of Education Week has a report headlined “What the Supreme Court Had to Say About School Board Members Blocking Constituents.”

“The Supreme Court seems stumped by two cases about free speech online; The justices appear to have no idea when they should get involved with online disputes between government officials and their constituents”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“$23,500 in Coins to Pay a Settlement? Judge Says Keep the Change and Try Again. A Colorado judge ordered a welding company to use a check or other conventional method to pay a settlement after it tried to deliver 6,500 pounds in coins.” Amanda Holpuch of The New York Times has this report.

“Too conservative for the Supreme Court? The nation’s most right-leaning appeals court draws scrutiny. Is a federal appeals court in Louisiana ‘testing the boundary’ of the conservative legal movement or just reflecting where the Supreme Court is moving the law?” John Fritze of USA Today has this report.

“A Small Fish and an Uncollected Fee Add Up to Big-Government Challenge at the Supreme Court; Herring fishermen and anti-regulation groups seek to overturn the ‘Chevron’ precedent that lets federal agencies interpret unclear statutes”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

“Trump fights loom large for a Supreme Court that has tried to ignore him; A tiff over a Trump-related T-shirt is just the beginning; The justices, despite their reluctance, may soon have to take up a flurry of major Trump legal disputes”: Josh Gerstein of Politico has this report.

“Enter the FBI: Surveillance, wiretaps and phone records dominate Day 4 of Adelson trial.” Jeff Burlew and Elena Barrera of The Tallahassee Democrat have this report.

And Peter Schorsch of Florida Politics has a post titled “Charlie Adelson trial Day 4 Part 1: Exactly 10 years ago, Adelson first solicited Magbanua to kill Dan Markel.”

“What Matters Most in the Supreme Court’s Upcoming Social Media Cases”: Jameel Jaffer has this guest essay online at The New York Times.

“Justices Will Probe Trademarks’ Nature in ‘Trump Too Small’ Case; Trademark office blocked ‘Trump Too Small’ in 2019; Appeals court overruled ban in 2022”: Kyle Jahner of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“The 2023 Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture”: The Heritage Foundation has posted this video on YouTube. Fifth Circuit Judge James C. Ho delivered the lecture.