“How the Supreme Court Made Legal Immigrants Vulnerable to Deportation; The court decisions are an abrupt turnaround for a population that entered the country legally and shared detailed information about their whereabouts with the government”: Hamed Aleaziz of The New York Times has this news analysis.

“The Only ‘Judicial Coup’ in This Country Is by Trump Against Judges; The Trump administration is getting its butt kicked in court; That’s great; But an unprecedented assault on the judiciary is coming”: Michael Tomasky has this essay online at The New Republic.

“Obscure provision in House bill threatens enforcement of court rulings on Trump; The legislative provision echoes a memo Trump signed March 11 directing the Justice Department to request bonds in all cases where judges block his policies”: Bart Jansen of USA Today has this report.

“There’s one thing stopping Trump: laws. Clearly we need to get rid of them. Let me put this in simple terms, so all the whiny libs out there can understand: We have too many laws, and too many judges interpreting those laws in ways I and the Trump administration don’t like.” Columnist Rex Huppke has this essay online at USA Today.

“Trump Officials Deported Another Man Despite Court Order; A federal appeals panel ordered officials not to deport a 31-year-old to El Salvador; Minutes later, it happened anyway; The government blamed ‘administrative errors’”: Mattathias Schwartz and Alan Feuer of The New York Times have this report.

“Nationwide Injunctions? Only if the Supreme Court Has Spoken. District judges shouldn’t be able to make policy in cases that require them to announce new law.” Law professor Jed Rubenfeld has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Inside the split between MAGA and the Federalist Society: Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society used to advise Trump on judges; Now the president and his most loyal allies are going after them.” Hailey Fuchs and Daniel Barnes of Politico have this report.

“Yes, There Will Be No Loper Bright ‘Revolution’; SCOTUS Is Taking the Decision’s Limits Seriously”: Adrian Vermeule has this post at “The New Digest” Substack site.

“Trump Championed Rulings That Are Now Being Used to Check His Power; In tariff case and others, courts are finding the president’s expansive view of executive authority clashes with decisions that limit its reach”: Jess Bravin and Jan Wolfe of The Wall Street Journal have this report.

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Trump Tariffs Face Threat at Supreme Court — Over Rulings That Blocked Biden.”

“Trump gets key wins at Supreme Court on immigration, despite some misgivings”: Andrew Chung of Reuters has this report.

“Trump’s deals with law firms are like deals ‘made with a gun to the head,’ lawyers say”: Carrie Johnson of NPR has this report.

“Lawyers for Migrants Press Appeals Court to Stop Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act; It was an opening salvo in what is likely to be the decisive legal battle over the president’s attempts to employ the rarely used wartime law as a centerpiece of his aggressive deportation agenda”: Alan Feuer of The New York Times has this report.

You can access the brief for appellants filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit via this link.

“Trump, Bashing the Federalist Society, Asserts Autonomy on Judge Picks; The president has grown increasingly angry at court rulings blocking parts of his agenda, including by judges he appointed”: Charlie Savage of The New York Times has this news analysis.

“Donald Trump vs. His Own Judges — His message to Justices Thomas and Alito: Don’t retire; Your replacement could be a partisan hack.” This editorial will appear in Saturday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Women sue Kansas over law that disregards end-of-life wishes during pregnancy; The lawsuit argues that nullifying pregnant people’s advance medical directives violates their rights in what appears to be the first such case since Roe was overturned”: Praveena Somasundaram of The Washington Post has this report.

“President Trump Isn’t a Tariff King; A sweeping trade court ruling puts the executive in his proper constitutional place”: This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

Online at The Atlantic, law professor Ilya Somin has an essay titled “A Victory for Separation of Powers — A court’s decision affirmed a fundamental American principle: The president is no king, and he does not have the power to impose taxes in the form of tariffs whenever he feels like it.”

And “The Volokh Conspiracy” has published a post titled “From Stanford Prof. Michael McConnell on the Tariff Decisions.”

“Some Thoughts On Emil Bove’s Third Circuit Nomination”: Ed Whelan has this post at National Review’s “Bench Memos” blog.

And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Josh Blackman has a post titled “The Coming Judicial Nomination Wars On The Right.”

“How a Small Wine Importer Took On Trump’s Tariffs; Business owner Victor Owen Schwartz teamed up with a libertarian legal group to fight in a landmark case”: Ruth Simon and James Fanelli of The Wall Street Journal have this report.

“Emil Bove Is Exactly the Kind of Judicial Nominee We Need in Trump 2.0”: Josh Hammer has this essay online at Townhall.

“Courts to Trump: You can’t teach old laws new tricks; The rulings against the Trump’s tariffs are the latest pushback from courts as the president seeks to harness emergency powers under seldom-used statutes.” Kyle Cheney of Politico has this report.

“Vance Courts Trouble for Trump. He takes on Chief Justice John Roberts. That’s unhelpful to the administration.” Columnist Kimberley A. Strassel has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Leonard Leo, who helped Trump win extraordinary power, is now a ‘bad person’ in the president’s eyes”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this news analysis.

“154. The Government’s Unclean Hands in D.V.D.; The Trump administration’s latest request for emergency relief from the Supreme Court hides the government’s deeply problematic litigation behavior behind a plausible jurisdictional objection.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“The Weaknesses in the Trump Tariff Rulings; The tariffs may be awful but two federal courts did not persuasively show that they are unlawful”: Jack Goldsmith has this post at the “Executive Functions” Substack site.

“Can You Do More Burpees Than Emil Bove, Trump’s Cartoonishly Unqualified Nominee to the Third Circuit? A brief investigation into Emil Bove’s illustrious CrossFit Open career.” Jay Willis has this post at his “Balls & Strikes” Substack site.

And Charles Toutant of New Jersey Law Journal has an article headlined “‘Emil Bove Has Fallen Short’: Critics Lambaste Trump’s 3rd Circuit Pick; Muting the reaction to the announcement is the fact that it’s unclear whether Bove would fill the New Jersey vacancy on the Third Circuit or the Delaware vacancy.”

“Federal Judges Increasingly Concerned That Trump Could Get Them Killed; Republicans’ threats against the judiciary have some judges trying to figure out just how unsafe they are”: Madiba K. Dennie has this post at Balls and Strikes.

“Trump goes after Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society in fury over court ruling; Trump’s attack came after the U.S. Court of International Trade struck down his tariffs, a blow to the primary pillar of his economic agenda”: Gregory Svirnovskiy and Josh Gerstein of Politico have this report.

“A Christian baker was sued for not serving a lesbian couple. The Supreme Court may hear her case. The debate over faith-based service refusals will soon be back in the national spotlight.” Kelsey Dallas of The Deseret News has this report.

“What is the U.S. Court of International Trade, which halted Trump’s tariffs? Federal judges ruled that the president went beyond his authority in imposing levies on goods imported from around the world.” Tobi Raji of The Washington Post has this report.

“Trump Officials Intensify Attacks on Judges as Court Losses Mount; White House reactions to unfavorable court rulings appeared designed to undermine confidence in the judiciary”: Luke Broadwater of The New York Times has this report.

“Will Trump Ignore Geographic Connections When Making Circuit Nominations? With the death of the blue slip, can the President just fill vacancies with the best available candidate?” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Bondi Eliminates ABA’s Role in Vetting Trump Judicial Picks; Continues trend from Trump first term, Biden presidency; Comes amid escalating tensions between ABA, Trump administration”: Tiana Headley of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Trump Tariff Appeal Heads to Specialist Court Known for Patents; Federal Circuit has ‘immense’ power over trade policy; Court decided a previous Trump tariff case in 2018”: Michael Shapiro of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“Chief Judge Questions Judicial Boycotts in Tossing Complaint; Dismissed complaint over judge not hiring Columbia clerks; Says boycotts may ‘embroil’ courts in public controversies”: Jacqueline Thomsen of Bloomberg Law has this report.

You can access the order of Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton at this link.

As the order explains:

A judge’s participation in a hiring boycott against graduates of a private university does not fit the ordinary meaning of “political activity,” because the boycott is not directed at governmental actions or policies that are the focus of the political process. A boycott may be seen, however, as raising similar problems where judges seek through the allocation of publicly-funded employment opportunities (or other allocations of public funds) to influence the behavior of private institutions on matters of public concern. The boycott at issue here involves only thirteen federal judges and one private institution, but the practice—if approved and widely accepted—could proliferate. Judges will have different views on what causes are righteous and which institutions or entities should be targeted. Widespread judicial boycotting based on issues of the day may well have the potential to embroil the judiciary in extrajudicial public controversies and to lower public confidence in the courts among reasonable people. There is thus a substantial question whether judges cross an important line when they go beyond expressing their personal views in an effort to persuade and begin using their power as government officials to pressure private institutions to conform to the judges’ preferences. See Orin Kerr, Boycotting Law Schools in Clerk Hiring as a Way to Influence Law School Culture, Reason Magazine Online (Sept. 29, 2022).

“Kannon Shanmugam to join Harvard Corporation; Alumnus of College and HLS elected to University’s senior governing board”: The Harvard Gazette has this report.

And in news coverage, Janet Lorin of Bloomberg News reports that “Harvard Picks Conservative Lawyer to Serve on Powerful Board.”