“Can this firm invest in only Black women? This case will decide. The legal firepower on both sides of the Fearless Fund case reflects the disparate views on the nature of discrimination and the role of history in shaping public policy.” Julian Mark of The Washington Post has this report.

“A former Democratic Georgia congressman hopes abortion can power his state Supreme Court bid”: Jeff Amy of The Associated Press has this report.

“University drag ban arguments focus on SCOTUS nondiscrimination policy decision; In response to questions from Judge James Ho, the student group’s lawyer, from FIRE, said he was not there to ‘defend’ 2010’s Christian Legal Society v. Martinez decision”: Chris Geidner has this post at his Substack site.

“No More Cutesy Stories About Unlikely Supreme Court Friendships; The justices (and the reporters who cover them) love to tell fun anecdotes about unlikely friendships between ideological opponents, which are cold comfort to real people who just lost their civil rights”: G.S. Hans has this essay online at Balls and Strikes.

“Amid Cases on Abortion and Trump, Roberts Reflects on Supreme Court’s Work; Oral arguments serve a crucial role at the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts said last week at Georgetown University; But they are not always what they seem”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“Why an Immunity Ruling in Trump’s Favor Might Not Alter the Shape of His Trial; Prosecutors believe Donald J. Trump’s official acts in trying to overturn the election should be admissible evidence even if the Supreme Court rules they cannot be the basis of the charges”: Charlie Savage of The New York Times has this news analysis.

“Student group urges court to force Texas university to allow drag show”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report. According to the article, “U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, a member of the three-judge panel who asked the bulk of the questions, said he was ‘profoundly sympathetic’ to Morris’ free speech arguments.”

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

“Supreme Court takes up prescription dog food, CBD products; With oral arguments completed for the current term, the justices have begun to add to next term’s docket”: Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service has this report.

“Samuel Alito’s Resentment Goes Full Tilt on a Black Day for the Court; The associate justice’s logic on display at the Trump immunity hearing was beyond belief; He’s at the center of one of the darkest days in Supreme Court history”: Michael Tomasky has this essay online at The New Republic.

“Court says state health-care plans can’t exclude gender-affirming surgery”: Rachel Weiner of The Washington Post has this report.

You can access today’s 147-page, 8-to-6 en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.

“SCOTUS Seems to Normalize Authoritarianism”: You can access today’s new episode of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast via this link.

“Democracy Dies at SCOTUS: Justice Alito suggests it’s better for democracy to let presidents commit crime with impunity. Cool.” You can access the new episode of Slate’s “Amicus” podcast via this link.

“Academic Freedom Under Fire: Politicians despise it; Administrators aren’t defending it; But it made our universities great — and we’ll miss it when it’s gone.” Louis Menand has this A Critic at Large essay in the May 6, 2024 issue of The New Yorker.

“78. ‘Writing a Rule . . . for the Ages’: The real problem with Thursday’s argument in the Trump immunity case is the extent to which it reveals a Supreme Court poised to paint itself into a deeply problematic (and unnecessary) corner.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court granted review in four new cases.