“The Supreme Court should have heeded Ketanji Brown Jackson’s wisdom”: Columnist George F. Will has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“‘He didn’t deserve to die like this’: Supreme Court decision leaves family of a man killed at the border searching for justice; An analysis by NBC News found the court has effectively dismantled the ability to file lawsuits against federal officials accused of violating constitutional rights.” Lawrence Hurley of NBC News has this report.

“The Amar Brief in Moore v. United States Should Not be Embraced”: Steven Calabresi has this guest post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Political questions and Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment”: Derek Muller has this post at the “Election Law Blog.”

“Will Baude”: You can access the new episode of the “Digging a Hole: The Legal Theory Podcast” via this link.

“Easy Win”: You can access the new episode of the “Divided Argument” podcast via this link.

“The rise of ‘Meghann Thee Reporter,’ the internet’s favorite court insider; Covering the trials of hip-hop celebs made Meghann Cuniff a star on social media; Now, she’s translating legalese for the masses”: Anne Branigin of The Washington Post has this report.

“Conservative Supreme Court could deny Floridians a say on abortion rights”: Skyler Swisher of The Orlando Sentinel has this report.

“Amazon resellers ask Supreme Court to clarify where online businesses can be sued”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Reuters has this post. You can access the petition for writ of certiorari at this link.

“Appeals court mulls reviving Felicia Sonmez’s lawsuit against Washington Post; The former Post journalist claims she was banned from #MeToo reporting because she’d experienced sexual assault”: Josh Gerstein of Politico has this report.

“Alberto Gonzales as Supreme Court Candidate; My unusual assignment in George W. Bush’s administration”: Ed Whelan has this post at his “Confirmation Tales” Substack site.

“Adelson flight to Vietnam lets state argue ‘consciousness of guilt’ in Markel murder”: Tim Jansen has this legal analysis online at The Tallahassee Democrat.

“Passing the Oral Argument Torch”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“Supreme Court Urged to Rule Against Mandatory Repatriation Tax; Couple says upholding tax would broaden Congress’s tax powers; US says law is indistinguishable from other income taxes”: John Woolley of Bloomberg Tax has this report.

You can access petitioners’ Reply Brief filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.

“The US supreme court’s new ‘ethics code’ is an embarrassment”: Columnist Moira Donegan has this essay online at The Guardian.

“The Supreme Court’s new ethics rules, decoded”: Columnist Alexandra Petri has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Grand jury indicts Donna Adelson in Dan Markel murder two days after Miami airport arrest”: Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“Spending on Pa. Supreme Court race broke records, set precedent for outside influence”: Stephen Caruso and Kate Huangpu of Spotlight PA have this report.

“Biden nominates union lawyer, Muslim American to U.S. appeals courts”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report.

Will Weissert of The Associated Press reports that “Biden announces 5 federal judicial nominees and stresses their varied professional backgrounds.”

Azi Paybarah of The Washington Post reports that “Biden nominee would be first Muslim on federal appellate court in U.S. history.”

Devan Cole of CNN reports that “Biden judicial pick would be the first Muslim American to serve on any federal appellate court.”

Zoë Richards of NBC News reports that “Biden to nominate attorney who would be first Muslim American judge on a federal appeals court; Adeel A. Mangi would serve on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals if confirmed by the Senate.”

Seth Stern of Bloomberg Law reports that “President Biden to Nominate First Muslim to a Circuit Court Seat.”

And David Wildstein of New Jersey Globe reports that “Biden taps North Jersey lawyer as first Muslim to serve as a federal appellate court judge; Adeel Mangi named to replace Joseph Greenaway as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.”

The White House today issued a news release titled “President Biden Names Forty-Second Round of Judicial Nominees.”

“US Supreme Court’s Ethics Code Borrows From Other Judges — But Not Always; Supreme Court announced conduct code following controversies; Justices’ version reflects ‘unique institutional setting’”: Zoe Tillman of Bloomberg News has this report.

Joan Biskupic of CNN has a news analysis headlined “Why the Supreme Court says ethics controversies are just a ‘misunderstanding.’”

In commentary, The Washington Post has published an editorial titled “Supreme Court’s new ethics code is a bigger deal than the critics claim.”

Online at The Washington Post, columnist Ruth Marcus has an essay titled “The Supreme Court’s ethics code amounts to ‘You’re not the boss of me.’”

Online at CNN, law professor Stephen I. Vladeck has an essay titled “The Supreme Court code of conduct misses this big thing.”

Online at Bloomberg Opinion, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Supreme Court’s New Code of Conduct Won’t Change a Thing; Although the justices can say they are not tone deaf to their own ethical lapses, they will continue to be the judges of their own ethical propriety.”

Online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “The Supreme Court’s new ethics code is a joke; The code is so weak that it serves to legitimize Clarence Thomas’s corruption; It is literally worse than nothing.”

At “Dorf on Law,” Michael C. Dorf has a blog post titled “The Status of the SCOTUS Code of Conduct.”

And online at The New Yorker, Andy Borowitz’s “The Borowitz Report” has a post titled “Clarence Thomas Collapses from Exhaustion After First Full Day of Regulating Himself.”

“Learning What Has Been Forgotten”: Third Circuit Judge Paul B. Matey has this post at “The New Digest” Substack site.

“The Liberal Agenda of the 1960s Has Reached a Fork in the Road”: Online at The New York Times, columnist Thomas B. Edsall has an essay that begins, “What do the strikingly different public responses to two recent Supreme Court rulings — one on abortion, the other on affirmative action — suggest about the prospects for the liberal agenda?”

“‘Passion and Prejudice’: Mitsubishi Seeks to Overturn Nearly $1B Defective Seatbelt Verdict; The filing comes on the heels of a motion for delay damages that seeks to raise the total award to more than $1 billion, and at a time when both sides are expanding their appellate firepower.” Max Mitchell of The Legal Intelligencer has this report, in which I am mentioned.

“The Supreme Court finally has a code of ethics, but it has a fatal flaw”: Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky has this essay online at The Los Angeles Times.

“U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear San Diego case involving unwitting drug couriers; Petition asks Supreme Court to decide if government witnesses can testify, generally rather than specifically, that ‘blind mules’ are not common”: Alex Riggins of The San Diego Union-Tribune has this report.

“The Supreme Court’s path to issuing an ethics code and the fine print”: Ann E. Marimow and Robert Barnes of The Washington Post have this report.

“We Waited 200 Years for This Supreme Court Ethics Code?” Jesse Wegman has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Oklahoma Supreme Court halts anti-abortion laws challenged by women’s rights groups”: M. Scott Carter of The Oklahoman has this report.

And Barbara Hoberock of The Tulsa World reports that “Oklahoma Supreme Court orders hold on enforcement of three abortion laws.”

You can access today’s 5-to-4 ruling of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma at this link.

“Donald Trump’s Insurrection Act Gambit; In a second term, he could use the law’s overbroad language to curtail liberties”: Columnist William A. Galston will have this op-ed in Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Indiana school ready to pay Paul Clement’s firm $200K to defend anti-trans bathroom ban; A contract obtained by Law Dork lays out the agreement, which shows the conservative lawyer took the case at a deep pay cut”: Chris Geidner has this post at his Substack site.

“Supreme Court’s New Ethics Code Is Toothless, Experts Say; The code of conduct issued on Monday, following reports of undisclosed travel and gifts, includes no enforcement mechanism and lets individual justices decide ethics questions for themselves”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news analysis.

Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service reports that “Supreme Court fails to quiet ethics critiques with new code of conduct; The high court aimed to tamp down criticism that its members were not accountable to ethics standards, but its code of conduct has only set off a new wave of admonishment.”

In commentary, online at Slate, law professor Steven Lubet has a Jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court’s New Attempt to Combat Its Scandals Is Not Going Well.”

And at Balls and Strikes, Jay Willis has a post titled “The Conservative Legal Movement’s Fingerprints Are All Over the SCOTUS Code of Conduct; The justices’ unenforceable ‘ethics code’ is also conspicuously tailored to all the unethical things the justices love doing so much.”

“Louisiana State Bar violated lawyers’ free speech rights, appeals court rules”: Daniel Wiessner of Reuters has this report.

Bernie Pazanowski of Bloomberg Law reports that “Louisiana Lawyer’s Rights Violated by Wellness, LGBTQ+ Posts.”

Cameron Langford of Courthouse News Service reports that “Fifth Circuit sides with Louisiana attorney in First Amendment row with state bar; An appellate panel stopped short of finding mandatory bar associations are unconstitutional; But it clarified what type of speech is off limits for them.”

And Avalon Zoppo of The National Law Journal reports that “Bar Association’s Mandatory Dues Violate 1st Amendment, 5th Circuit Says; The Louisiana State Bar Association ‘crossed the line when it promoted purely informational articles absent any tailoring to the legal profession,’ Judge Jerry Smith wrote for the three-member panel.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.

“‘Journey to justice’: Donna Adelson’s arrest is a ‘major win’ for the Markel family.” Elena Barrera of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report.

“What SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein Doesn’t Miss About the Court”: You can access at this link today’s new installment of David Lat’s “Exclusive Jurisdiction” column online at Bloomberg Law.

“Read Donna Adelson arrest warrant: Talk of fleeing, suicide and ‘getting things in order.’” Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report. The newspaper has posted the document at this link.

Lynn Hatter and Gina Jordan of WFSU report that “One week after her son’s murder conviction, Donna Adelson is arrested.”

And Peter Schorsch of Florida Politics has a post titled “Donna Adelson arrested attempting to flee country, justice watchers fired up.”