“Supreme Court Blocks Texas Law Regulating Social Media Platforms; The law, prompted by conservative complaints about censorship, prohibits big technology companies like Facebook and Twitter from removing posts based on the views they express”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes and Cat Zakrzewski of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court puts Texas social media law on hold while legal battle continues.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court blocks Texas law to shield conservatives against alleged censorship on Facebook and Twitter.”
Jacob Gershman and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Gives Tech Industry Reprieve From Texas Social-Media Law; Law would allow people to sue online platforms if blocked online because of their viewpoints.”
John Fritze and Jessica Guynn of USA Today report that “Supreme Court blocks Texas law that banned Facebook, Twitter from moderating posts; Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a dissent that it is not yet clear how the high court’s precedents may apply to regulating the internet.”
And Ryan Lovelace of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court blocks Texas from enforcing social media law.”
You can access today’s 5-to-4 order of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link.
“What the End of Roe v. Wade Will Mean for the Next Generation of Obstetricians; An aspiring ob-gyn’s views on abortion might determine what training she seeks out, which specialities she pursues, and where she chooses to live; In a post-Roe world, that self-sorting process would grow even more intense”: Emma Green has this Annals of Education article online at The New Yorker.
“Austin pushing to effectively decriminalize abortion ahead of ruling on Roe; The state’s so-called trigger law, which would take effect 30 days after a Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe, includes the nation’s harshest criminal penalties on abortion”: Megan Messerly of Politico has a report that begins, “The city of Austin is attempting to shield its residents from prosecution under a Texas law that would criminalize almost all abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned — the first push by a major city in a red state to try to circumvent state abortion policy.”
“Republican bill would make Supreme Court leaks a crime”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.
And Emily Brooks of The Hill reports that “GOP bill would criminalize Supreme Court leaks.”
You can access the text of the Leaker Accountability Act of 2022 at this link.
“Innocence Isn’t Enough”: You can access this week’s new episode of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast, hosted by law professors Kate Shaw, Melissa Murray, and Leah Litman, via this link.
“Hiring a hitman: Inside a Florida dentist’s alleged plot to have his sister’s ex, a prominent attorney, killed; A Florida lawyer allegedly contended with nightmare in-laws and faced fatal consequences.” Stephanie Pagones of Fox News has this article reporting on the continuing investigation into the murder of law professor Dan Markel.
“Who has been getting abortions in Massachusetts? Take a look at the data.” Stephanie Ebbert and Christina Prignano of The Boston Globe has this report.
“The Supreme Court and the Originalist Fallacy: As the Court’s conservative majority readies opinions on abortion and guns, they cling to the idea that we can know what the Founders meant; It’s not that simple.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at Washington Monthly.
“U.S. Supreme Court leak stirs abortion passions in Africa”: Andrew Cawthorne of Reuters has this report.
“Supreme Court asked to weigh in on Pennsylvania mail-in ballot law”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has this report.
“Supreme Court decisions due soon on abortion, guns, religion and climate change”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this report.
“Do Dissents of the Past Foreshadow Dissents on the Current Court?” Adam Feldman has this post at his “Empirical SCOTUS” blog.
“Ah, Look At All the Potential People.” Sherry F. Colb has this blog post at “Dorf on Law.”
“CNN: SCOTUS Investigation Demands Phone Records From Clerks, Who Must Sign Affidavits; Leaks about the leaks continue.” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”
“Justices Face Heavy Lift for Supreme Court Term Homestretch”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law has this report.
Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court did not grant review in any new cases but called for the views of the Solicitor General in one case.
“Katherine Magbanua trial: Three things jurors weighed in convicting her in Markel murder.” Jeff Burlew of The Tallahassee Democrat has this report (subscription required for access).
“My Governor Can Pass Bad Abortion Laws. But I Won’t Enforce Them.” Fairfax County, Virginia Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano has this guest essay online at The New York Times.
“We Clerked for Justices Scalia and Stevens. America Is Getting Heller Wrong.” Law professor Kate Shaw and attorney John Bash have this guest essay online at The New York Times.
“Supreme Court leak investigation heats up as clerks are asked for phone records in unprecedented move”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.
