In Bashman news from Australia: Yahoo!7 News and the Australian Associated Press combine to report that “Two thugs bash man unconscious waiting for Melbourne tram.”

“Suit: Politics, porn scandal behind changes in Pa. ballot question.” In today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Maria Panaritis has an article that begins, “A court filing Tuesday suggested that political motives and concerns over a Supreme Court pornography scandal were behind efforts to alter the wording of a judicial retirement-age ballot question to extend the tenure of Pennsylvania judges to age 75.”

And last Thursday, The Philadelphia Daily News published an editorial titled “Plan to change retirement age for judges seems shady.”

You can access the documents filed in the case, including the Brief for Appellants filed yesterday, via this link.

“7th Circuit dogs insurer’s defense”: Marilyn Odendahl of The Indiana Lawyer has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.

“Donald Trump Suggests ‘Second Amendment People’ Could Act Against Hillary Clinton”: Nick Corasaniti and Maggie Haberman of The New York Times have an article that begins, “Donald J. Trump on Tuesday appeared to raise the possibility that gun rights supporters could take matters into their own hands if Hillary Clinton is elected president and appoints judges who favor stricter gun control measures to the bench. At a rally here, Mr. Trump warned that it would be ‘a horrible day’ if Mrs. Clinton were elected and got to appoint a tiebreaking Supreme Court justice.”

“CDA settles with Markel family”: In today’s edition of The Tallahassee Democrat, Sean Rossman has a front page article that begins, “The Consolidated Dispatch Agency will pay the family of slain Florida State law professor Dan Markel $40,000 to avoid litigation over his 2014 death. The money will be paid by the CDA’s general liability insurance policy to Markel’s sons, who were toddlers when he was killed.”

“Why Trusting Donald Trump on Judges Is Folly; Supreme Court appointments are not a persuasive reason for conservatives to back the billionaire”: Conor Friedersdorf has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“Tenth Circuit: Accessing email is a ‘search’ under the Jones trespass test.” Online today at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post that begins, “Judge Neil Gorsuch is one of my favorite judges, and I don’t lightly or often take issue with his opinions. But on Friday, Gorsuch handed down an important Fourth Amendment case that has a somewhat puzzling section with far-reaching implications.”

You can access last Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit at this link.

“Constitution Check: Is Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act a dead letter?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“Tinkers Talk of Their Historic Case, Importance of Student Free Speech”: David L. Hudson Jr. has this report online at the Newseum Institute.

“U.S. court revives Ten Commandments monument lawsuit against NK-A School District”: Liz Hayes of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued today.

Circuit Judge D. Brooks Smith, who later this year is expected to become the Third Circuit’s chief judge, issued a 22-page opinion concurring dubitante.

“Court strikes down N.J. sports betting law”: John Brennan of The Record of Hackensack, New Jersey has this report.

Brent Johnson and Jonathan D. Salant of NJ.com report that “N.J. loses again in quest to bring sports betting to state.”

Joe Drape of The New York Times reports that “Federal Court Blocks New Jersey Plan to Legalize Sports Betting.”

Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “New Jersey sports betting law struck down by U.S. appeals court.”

The Associated Press reports that “Court again says New Jersey can’t legalize sports betting.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Christie-Backed Sports Betting Law in N.J. Blocked by Court.”

You can access today’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link.

“Merrick Garland chokes up at service for pal”: Kim Janssen of The Chicago Tribune has an article that begins, “He may have started out as the original ‘nobody nobody sent,’ but Abner Mikva was sent off in grand style Monday at a memorial service where he was feted by a crowd of political heavyweights including a Supreme Court justice and the president of the United States.”

“Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg discusses the 2015-16 term”: Duke University School of Law has posted this video online at YouTube.

“New York City Can Require Sodium Warnings, Judge Rules”: John Surico had this article in The New York Times back in February 2016.

And Bloomberg News reported on the decision in an article headlined “New York’s Salt-Shaker Warning Survives Legal Challenge.”

The case is now on appeal in New York State court, and yesterday plaintiff-appellant the National Restaurant Association filed its opening brief on appeal.

Seventh Circuit grants rehearing en banc in a case the dissent criticized as “enabling police seizures for ‘parking while black'”: Thanks to a reader of the blog, I have learned that yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued this order granting rehearing en banc in the case.

Yesterday’s order granting en banc review vacated the earlier opinion of a divided three-judge Seventh Circuit panel. This blog’s coverage of that earlier decision appeared here and here.

Programming note: I am about to head into an oral argument prep cocoon from which I expect to emerge at some point tomorrow afternoon once the oral argument in question has concluded. In the interim, as often happens while I am away from my work and home computers, additional appellate-related retweets likely will appear on this blog’s Twitter feed. Additional blog posts will appear here on Tuesday afternoon.

Update: My appellate oral argument midday Tuesday went very well. I will provide links to any news coverage that appears. At some point during my oral argument on behalf of plaintiffs-appellees, I heard something resembling an outcry or commotion from opposing counsel’s table just to the right of where I was standing. After the oral argument, one of the attorneys on my team told me the noise occurred when one of the two attorneys sitting at the table for opposing counsel had his or her cell phone start ringing during the oral argument.

“College Students Go to Court Over Sexual Assault”: Law professor Jeannie Suk Gersen has this post online at The New Yorker.

“Did Obama win the judicial wars? Liberals say he shied away from too many battles and ran into GOP roadblocks; But the result is still a transformation of U.S. courts.” Michael Grunwald of Politico.com has this report.

“Courts Channel Scalia and Get Different Answers”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online today at Bloomberg View.

“On Voting, Courts Stepping Up to Responsibilities”: Kenneth Jost had this post yesterday at his blog, “Jost on Justice.”

“Justice Kennedy’s evolution on race”: Joan Biskupic of CNN.com has this report.

“Republicans Are Not Attacking Democracy; Not every battle over voting is an assault on democratic values”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this essay online today at The Atlantic.

“Congratulations! @howappealing is now verified.” So states the subject line of an email that just arrived from Twitter. Thanks to all of this blog’s many, many readers and Twitter followers for helping to bring about that good news. You can follow this blog on Twitter via this link.

“Where does the government immigration case stand now?” Lyle Denniston has this post today at the “Constitution Daily” blog of the National Constitution Center.

“3 decades later, murder plea deal is still in dispute”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times had this report in March 2015 about the oral argument of a California state prisoner’s habeas appeal before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Today, the majority on a divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel issued a decision affirming the district court’s denial of habeas relief in the case.

“Chevron Wins Ruling Blocking $8.6 Billion Order in Ecuador Fight”: Bloomberg News has this report.

The Associated Press reports that “US court rules for Chevron in Ecuador rainforest-damage case.”

And Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Chevron beats U.S. appeal in Ecuador pollution case.”

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

“Criminal Defendants Sometimes ‘Left Behind’ at Supreme Court, Study Shows”: Adam Litpak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

“The crusade of a Democratic superlawyer with multimillion-dollar backing”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has an article that begins, “After a lopsided string of court victories knocking down state voting restrictions, Democratic superlawyer Marc E. Elias was literally flying high last week in his pursuit of other Republican-initiated voting laws he says hurt his party’s most loyal constituencies.”

Sixth Circuit again reinstates Ohio dentist’s lawsuit challenging regulation limiting when a dentist may advertise as a specialist: You can access Friday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit at this link.

En banc Fifth Circuit holds that “crime of violence” definition incorporated by reference into U.S. Sentencing Guidelines is not unconstitutionally vague under Johnson v. United States: You can access Friday’s en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.

“Court: IRS needs to prove it isn’t targeting conservative groups.” Wesley Bruer of CNN.com has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued on Friday.

“Obama allies: GOP will cave in Supreme Court fight.” Lydia Wheeler of The Hill has an article that begins, “Liberal groups say they are increasingly confident that Senate Republicans will crack after the November election and confirm Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.”

“Breyer Brings Back Courtesy — at a Cost; Justice Stephen Breyer’s attempt to return internal respect to the Supreme Court is noble, but he chose the wrong case to make his point”: Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“Professors as Amici”: Adam Feldman has this post today at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.

Programming note: Thanks to a three-day weekend at the southern New Jersey shore, where the weather is beautiful today, additional posts will appear here Sunday night. As always while I am away, new appellate-related retweets may appear on this blog’s Twitter feed in the interim.