“The Gaping Hole in Supreme Court Rules for Tracking Links Between Litigants and Influence Groups: Parties appearing before the Supreme Court can fund the groups that file briefs supporting their arguments — and almost never have to disclose it.” Shawn Musgrave of The Intercept recently had this report.

“Trump’s immunity arguments and the experiences of the justices who might support it”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“John Roberts isn’t happy with previous ruling against Trump — what happens now?” Joan Biskupic of CNN has this news analysis.

“A SCOTUS Firehose in Trump v United States”: Michael C. Dorf has this post at his blog, “Dorf on Law.”

“A Couple of Thoughts about the Comstock Act”: James M. Beck has this post at his “Drug & Device Law” blog.

“Harvey Weinstein Sex-Crimes Conviction Thrown Out by New York High Court; Court rules disgraced film producer didn’t receive a fair trial, orders new proceedings”: Erin Mulvaney and Jacob Gershman of The Wall Street Journal have this report.

Jenny Jarvie, Richard Winton, and Stephen Battaglio of The Los Angeles Times report that “Harvey Weinstein rape conviction overturned by N.Y. court; California conviction stays.”

And James Queally, Richard Winton, and Jenny Jarvie of The Los Angeles Times have an article headlined “Is Harvey Weinstein’s California conviction in jeopardy after N.Y. appeals ruling?”

You can access today’s 4-to-3 ruling of the Court of Appeals of New York — that state’s highest court — at this link.

“First bigotry, now lies: This judge pick deserves better.” The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger has published this editorial.

“The Last Thing This Supreme Court Could Do to Shock Us; There will be no more self-soothing after this”: Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“King Donald’s Day at the Supreme Court: A political hit job? A military coup? Trump’s lawyer tests the boundaries of a truly imperial Presidency.” Susan B. Glasser has this essay online at The New Yorker.

“Conservative Justices Appear Poised to Rule Ex-Presidents Have Some Level of Immunity; Such a ruling would probably send the case back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court seems poised to allow Trump Jan. 6 trial, but not immediately; Conservative and liberal justices grappled with the historic significance of a case that will also immediately impact 2024 election.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court’s conservatives lean in favor of limited immunity for Trump as an ex-president.”

Jess Bravin and Jan Wolfe of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Appears Open to Some of Donald Trump’s Immunity Claims; Justices consider whether former president can be prosecuted on charges he conspired to steal 2020 election.”

And Alex Swoyer and Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times report that “Supreme Court struggles with immunity for presidents over official acts.”

“On presidential immunity, a riveting national civics lesson”: Mark Walsh has this View from the Court post at “SCOTUSblog.”

“The debate about Sonia Sotomayor is not about sexism. It’s more dire. Some want the Supreme Court justice to retire so that President Biden can name a replacement before . . . before what happens, exactly?” Columnist Monica Hesse has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Guess what’s not a priority in antiabortion Idaho. Women’s health.” Columnist Ruth Marcus has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Trump’s Immunity Claim Joins His Plans to Increase Executive Power; The former president is asking the Supreme Court to put the presidency above criminal law as he pursues a broader agenda of expanding the office’s power should he win the election”: Charlie Savage of The New York Times has this news analysis.

“The Lawyer Defending Idaho’s Abortion Ban Irritated the One Justice He Needed on His Side”: Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Supreme Court Appears Sharply Divided in Emergency Abortion Case; The justices weighed whether a federal law aimed at protecting access to emergency medical care superseded Idaho’s near-total abortion ban”: Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times has this report.

And Alex Swoyer and Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times report that “Biden takes another avenue to push nationwide abortion.”

“The Supreme Court’s likely to make it more dangerous to be pregnant in a red state; But it’s not yet clear they’ve settled on a rationale for doing so”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Justice Alito Voices Support for Fetal Rights in Federal Law; Idaho’s near-total abortion ban at issue; Reference to ‘unborn child’ in federal law questioned”: Lydia Wheeler of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“A new Supreme Court case seeks to make it much easier for criminals to buy guns; The fight over ‘ghost guns’ is back before the justices”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Conservative justices skeptical federal law requires emergency room abortions”: Ann E. Marimow and Caroline Kitchener of The Washington Post have this report.

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court sounds wary of Idaho’s ban on emergency abortions for women whose health is in danger.”

“In Immunity Case, Trump Can Lose in Ways That Amount to a Win; After the justices hear arguments on Thursday, how they decide may be just as important as what they decide”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post has an article headlined “By looking to future, Supreme Court may push Trump’s D.C. trial past election.”

And Maureen Groppe of USA Today has an article headlined “When it comes to Trump Supreme Court bid for immunity, his test case is Richard Nixon; The Supreme Court said Nixon couldn’t be sued for official acts. Trump wants that same protection extended to criminal charges.”

“The Supreme Court Has Already Botched the Trump Immunity Case”: Law professors Melissa Murray and Andrew Weissmann have this guest essay online at The New York Times.

“Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Emergency Abortions; Justices weigh doctor responsibilities in states with abortion bans”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

John Kruzel and Andrew Chung of Reuters report that “US Supreme Court split over Idaho’s strict abortion ban in medical emergencies.”

And Lawrence Hurley of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court hears abortion clash over emergency room treatment for pregnant women; The Biden administration says Idaho’s near-total abortion ban conflicts with a federal law setting standards for hospital emergency room care.”

“A majority of Americans no longer trust the Supreme Court. Can it rebuild?” Henry Gass of The Christian Science Monitor has this report.

“Trump Shaped the Supreme Court; Now He Wants His Victory; Former president expects loyalty while justices stress independence”: Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar again in the spotlight fighting the conservative Supreme Court on abortion”: Tierney Sneed of CNN has this report.

“A Simple Fix for Texas’s Right-Wing Courts: More Judges; The Fifth Circuit’s become little more than a junior varsity version of the Supreme Court; Some fresh faces on the bench will help put things right.” Matt Ford has this essay online at The New Republic.

“Pa. High Court Reversal Rate of Superior Court Rulings Has Plummeted, Report Shows; Appellate lawyers who spoke with The Legal said there is not a clear reason for the drop-off, but the change could be linked to the type of cases the justices are taking up”: Aleeza Furman of The Legal Intelligencer has this report, in which I am quoted.

“The Most Harmony at the Beginning of a Term that Most of Us Have Ever Seen”: Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

“SCOTUS Has a Chance to Right the Wrong Its EMTALA Ruling Forced; Will it listen?” Lindsay Harrison and Dahlia Lithwick have this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“The Core Issues in Trump v. United States: One Road Map; The impact of the decision on future presidencies is the central consideration.” Jack Goldsmith has this post at the “Lawfare” blog.

“Trump and Attorney General Agree on Minor Changes to $175 Million Bond; Letitia James had asked a court to reject the bond that Donald J. Trump posted in his civil fraud case. A deal on Monday will keep the terms of the bond largely unchanged”: Matthew Haag of The New York Times has this report.

“Grants Pass council president and her mother first in line, camping out on the edge of U.S. Supreme Court”: Maxine Bernstein of The Oregonian has this report.

“Two new justices will create female majority on Minnesota Supreme Court; Gov. Tim Walz elevates Court of Appeals Judge Theodora Gaïtas and Stearns County Judge Sarah Hennesy”: Rochelle Olson of The Minneapolis Star Tribune has this report.

“Trump’s Immunity Gambit at Supreme Court: A Delay Is Still a Victory; Special counsel pushes for fast trial as Nov. 5 election looms; A court shaped by Trump will decide fate of election charges.” Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.

And in commentary, online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “Donald Trump already won the only Supreme Court fight that mattered; This case is about delaying his trial, and the GOP-controlled Supreme Court has given him everything he could reasonably hope for and more.”