“Judicial Notice (01.05.25): Brave New World; A filing requirement lawyers need to know about, Biglaw bonus reversals, Kirkland’s continuing conquest, and the trailing off of Trump litigation.” David Lat has this post at his “Original Jurisdiction” Substack site.

“116. The Corporate Transparency Act and Nationwide Injunctions: The 19th — and, likely, last — emergency application from the Biden administration includes a (surprising) request that the justices conclusively settle the propriety of ‘universal’ equitable relief.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“Riggs, Democrats rally in Raleigh pledging to win contested NC Supreme Court race”: Josh Shaffer and Kyle Ingram of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina have this report.

“N.Y. Judge’s Ruling Shows How Legal Issues Will Follow Trump Into Office; Donald Trump may not face a penalty for his conviction in the hush-money case, but he could still be the first felon to be president — and civil proceedings against him continue”: Maggie Haberman of The New York Times has this news analysis.

“SMU’s bid to split from United Methodist Church over LGBTQ+ rights heads to Texas Supreme Court; Southern Methodist University in Dallas tried to declare its independence after the church voted to ban gay weddings and clergy in 2019”: Kate McGee of The Texas Tribune has this report.

“Pillen appoints associate justice to Nebraska Supreme Court”: Zach Wendling of Nebraska Examiner has this report.

“Riggs responds to Griffin’s request to delay certification of the NC Supreme Court election”: Lynn Bonner of NC Newsline has this report.

And The Carolina Journal reports that “Griffin defends request to send NC ballot dispute back to state court.”

“TikTok and Government Clash in Last Round of Supreme Court Briefs; The briefs, filed a week before oral arguments, offered sharply differing accounts of China’s influence over the site and the role of the First Amendment”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

And Alexandra Marquez of NBC News reports that “Justice Department urges Supreme Court to reject Trump’s push to pause TikTok ban; In a legal filing on Friday, the Justice Department argued that the law that effectively bans TikTok doesn’t violate the First Amendment’s right to free speech.”

“John Roberts’ New Year Blame Game: The Chief chose to misappropriate some civil-rights history for his end-of-year victimhood claiming.” You can access the new episode of Slate’s “Amicus” podcast via this link.

“Man charged with plotting to kill Kavanaugh asks judge to exclude evidence against him; Court filings reveal new details about what Nicholas Roske told investigators”: Josh Gerstein of Politico has this report.

“Decertifying a Certified Appeal Under § 1292(b): A divided Fifth Circuit held that a motions panel had erred in permitting a certified appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).” Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog.

“Appellate court ruling: Trial court won’t hear conflict claims by Charlie Adelson.” Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has a report that begins, “The 1st District Court of Appeal has rejected a request by Charlie Adelson to allow his case to go back to a lower court — where he was convicted in the 2014 murder of Dan Markel — so he could raise conflict of interest claims in hopes of securing a new trial.”

You can access yesterday’s order of Florida’s First District Court of Appeal at this link.

“John Roberts Is Imagining Things: We can all agree that Supreme Court justices shouldn’t face threats of physical violence; But only in the chief justice’s warped, cloistered world does criticism of the high court constitute intimidation.” Matt Ford has this essay online at The New Republic.

“John Roberts Will Say Anything to Keep His Hold On Power; The chief justice’s annual end-of-year report is not about addressing problems with the judiciary, but is instead about ensuring that it remains unaccountable”: Madiba K. Dennie has this essay online at Balls and Strikes.

And at his “Balls & Strikes” Substack site, Jay Willis has a post titled “We Regret to Inform You That John Roberts Is Maybe More Powerful Than Ever; During the second Trump administration, the Supreme Court’s six-justice conservative supermajority will be doing its dirty work with the political winds at its back.”

“Amicus Deep Dive 2024 [Deep Dive #4]: A look at who is dominating the amicus terrain in the Supreme Court and beyond.” Adam Feldman has this post at his “Legalytics” Substack site.

“Bonus 115: The Chief Justice’s Tone-Deaf Year-End Report; There’s a rich (and ongoing) debate over the relationship between public criticism of the courts and judicial independence; Chief Justice Roberts’s annual missive missed just about all of the nuance.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“US Supreme Court’s Thomas will not be referred to Justice Department, judiciary says”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has this report.

“Net Neutrality Rules Struck Down by Appeals Court; After nearly two decades of fighting, the battle over regulations that treat broadband providers as utilities came to an end on Thursday”: Cecilia Kang of The New York Times has this report.

Eva Dou of The Washington Post reports that “In blow to Democrats, federal appeals court strikes down net neutrality; The Biden administration’s FCC had considered its reinstatement of the rules on internet service providers a signature accomplishment.”

Drew FitzGerald of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Federal Court Strikes a Final Blow to FCC’s Net-Neutrality Rules; Appeals-court decision ends effort to regulate internet providers like utilities, citing Supreme Court decision restraining federal agencies’ powers.”

And at his Substack site, Chris Geidner has a post titled “In striking down net-neutrality rule, Sixth Circuit asserts newfound judicial supremacy; A panel of three GOP appointees used their post-Chevron judicial power, blocking a rule backed by the Biden administration that aimed to protect open internet access.”

“Banning TikTok Would Violate America’s Free Speech Tradition; It’s up to the Supreme Court whether the U.S. will join China, Afghanistan and other authoritarian countries that have barred their citizens from using the popular social media app”: Jacob Mchangama and Jeff Kosseff have this essay online at The Wall Street Journal.

“John Roberts on Defying the Courts; The Chief calls out the growing threats of violence against judges”: This editorial will appear in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“US Asks Supreme Court to Unblock Corporate Transparency Act; Supreme Court asked to stay injunction amid appeal; Corporate disclosures would be due in January”: Quinn Wilson of Bloomberg Law has this report.

You can access the federal government’s application at this link.

“Elections board urges federal judge to keep NC Supreme Court dispute, rule against Griffin”: The Carolina Journal has this report.

“Jamie Raskin Understands That Democrats Need to Fight the Supreme Court; As the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, the outspoken Court critic gets to set the agenda for his fellow Democrats on judiciary-related issues — and prepare to chair the committee next time Democrats control the House”: Molly Coleman has this essay online at Balls and Strikes.

“Trump tests Supreme Court power with TikTok intervention; Trump’s TikTok brief is an alarming preview of how he sees the Supreme Court and how he intends to treat it once he returns to office: as another arm of his MAGA empire that he can control on demand.” Columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr has this essay online at The Boston Globe.

“Elon Musk Pay Deal Decision Appealed to Delaware High Court; Delaware chancellor blocked $56 billion pay deal last January; Florida shareholders appealed decision voiding record pay”: Gillian R. Brassil of Bloomberg Law has this report.

“The huge stakes in a new Supreme Court case about pornography; Texas asks the justices to abandon longstanding First Amendment protections for sexual speech”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“Biden Made the Judiciary More Diverse — but Not More Liberal; Judicial nominees largely succeeded other like-minded judges, failing to offset Trump’s conservative legal inroads”: Jan Wolfe of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“Pentagon Appeals Court Upholds Plea Deals in Sept. 11 Case; The three-judge decision appeared, at least for now, to put plea proceedings for Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and two others back on track to take place in early January at Guantánamo Bay”: Carol Rosenberg of The New York Times has this report.

“The chief justice takes a swipe at JD Vance; The vice president-elect has repeatedly suggested that government officials may defy court orders”: Columnist Ruth Marcus has this essay online at The Washington Post.

“Judge orders NC elections board to explain why Griffin protest belongs in federal court”: The Carolina Journal has this report, along with a report headlined “Daschle, Gephardt file brief opposing Griffin in NC Supreme Court ballot dispute.”

“‘Lawless’: Trump’s TikTok brief asks Supreme Court to overreach, legal experts say; Lawyers believe the president-elect’s request for the Supreme Court to delay the TikTok law lacks a legal basis — and they fear it’s an early sign that Trump plans to blow past precedent.” Brendan Bordelon of Politico has this report.

“Big Cases by the Numbers [December 30, 2024]: This first edition highlights several important cases litigated by some of the biggest national firms over the last month.” Adam Feldman has this post at his “Legalytics” Substack site.

“Trump Tries to Save TikTok From the Law; He wants the Supreme Court to treat him as if he’s already President”: The Wall Street Journal has published this editorial.

It concludes, “One last legal point: Mr. Trump’s brief is signed by John Sauer, his nominee to be Solicitor General. But the SG isn’t supposed to be Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, and Mr. Sauer’s brief won’t help his credibility with the Justices if he is confirmed by the Senate. We trust the Justices will ignore this amicus sophistry.”

“Trump may tally the most Supreme Court appointments of any president in recent history”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.

“Chief Justice Roberts Condemns Threats to Judicial Independence; In his year-end report on the federal judiciary, the chief justice decried violence, intimidation and disinformation and warned against defiance of court rulings”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Justin Jouvenal of The Washington Post reports that “Chief Justice Roberts warns of threats to judges in year-end report; Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. presented an annual year-end report on the state of the judiciary.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Chief Justice Says Intimidation and Violence Threaten Judicial Independence; But John Roberts’s year-end report remains silent on Supreme Court ethics.”

Maureen Groppe of USA Today has an article headlined “Chief Justice John Roberts: Courts’ independence under threat from violence; Roberts said not everyone engages in ‘informed criticism’ of the court, ‘or anything resembling it.’”

And at his Substack site, Chris Geidner has a post titled “John Roberts attacks court criticism that he decides lacks a ‘credible basis’ as ‘illegitimate’; Conflating violence against judges with broad criticism the court faces for its extremism, the chief justice ultimately sends a chilling end-of-year report.”

You can access Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s “2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary” at this link.