“Seth Aframe — Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit”: Harsh Voruganti has this post at his blog, “The Vetting Room.”

“U.S. Supreme Court rejects review of Derek Chauvin’s latest appeal attempt; Chauvin, 47, remains incarcerated at a medium-security federal prison in Tucson, Ariz.” Kim Hyatt of The Minneapolis Star Tribune has this report.

“Federal Court Moves to Drastically Weaken Voting Rights Act; The ruling, which is almost certain to be appealed to the Supreme Court, would effectively bar private citizens and civil rights groups from suing under a key provision of the landmark law”: Nick Corasaniti of The New York Times has this report.

Mariana Alfaro of The Washington Post reports that “Appeals court decision could limit enforcement of Voting Rights Act.”

Mariah Timms of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Appeals Court Curbs Voting Lawsuits Claiming Discrimination; If it stands, the 2-1 decision would mark a sea change in the law.”

Dale Ellis of The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports that “8th Circuit Court upholds ruling that says only the federal government can bring voting rights lawsuits.”

Matt Campbell of Arkansas Times reports that “Appeals court sides with Arkansas federal judge on restricting Voting Rights Act lawsuits.”

Fredreka Schouten of CNN reports that “Appeals court strikes down key tool used to enforce Voting Rights Act.”

Alex Ebert of Bloomberg Law reports that “Legal ‘Seachange’ Blocks Voters’ Racial Discrimination Suits.”

Zach Montellaro of Politico reports that “Federal appeals court ruling threatens enforcement of the Voting Rights Act; The decision from the 8th Circuit is likely headed to the Supreme Court.”

Miranda Nazzaro of The Hill reports that “Appeals court says private citizens, civil rights groups can’t sue under Voting Rights Act.”

And Ryan Tarinelli of Roll Call reports that “Appeals court rules private groups can’t file lawsuits over key Voting Rights Act section; 8th Circuit finds a ‘deeper look’ at 1965 law shows Congress only authorized U.S. attorney general to pursue such discrimination claims.”

“Support for Abortion Access Is Near Record, WSJ-NORC Poll Finds; Some 55% of respondents say a pregnant woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason”: Julie Wernau of The Wall Street Journal has this report.

“The Rise and Fall of the Roman Numeral”: Law professor Tessa L. Dysart has this essay in the Summer 2023 issue of The Green Bag.

“US appeals court ruling strikes at core of landmark voting rights law”: Joseph Ax of Reuters has this report.

“Court Signals It Could Keep but Narrow Trump Election Case Gag Order; A federal appeals court panel is weighing how to balance the former president’s free-speech rights against insulating prosecutors, court personnel and potential witnesses from intimidation”: Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage of The New York Times have this report.

C. Ryan Barber and Sadie Gurman of The Wall Street Journal report that “Trump’s Gag Order Comes Under Appeals Court’s Scrutiny; Panel to decide whether his speech can be restricted in connection with his criminal trial on election-interference charges.”

Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Times reports that “Appeals panel grapples with scope of Trump gag order in Jack Smith case.”

Alex Woodward of The Independent (UK) reports that “Judges aren’t buying Trump’s gag order appeal; Federal appeals court seems open to a narrow order that blocks the former president’s threats.”

Eric Tucker, Alanna Durkin Richer, and Lindsay Whitehurst of The Associated Press report that “Appeals court weighs reinstating gag order on Trump in landmark DC election case.”

Mike Scarcella of Reuters reports that “Trump gag order appeal faces skeptical reception in US court.”

And Daniel Barnes and Dareh Gregorian of NBC News report that “Skeptical judges grill Trump lawyers and prosecutors on gag order in election interference case; Trump has argued the order violates his First Amendment rights, while special counsel Jack Smith’s office says the former president is trying to influence and intimidate witnesses.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has posted the audio of today’s oral argument on YouTube at this link.

“Justices Kavanaugh And Barrett’s Shadow Docket Concurrence In The Hamburger Mary’s Case; The good, the bad, and the ugly”: Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”

“Eighth Circuit’s Holding that Private Plaintiffs Do Not Have Right to Sue to Enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act Would Decimate the Rights of Minority Voters; Supreme Court Review Almost Certain”: Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law Blog.”

You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at this link.

“The Supreme Court’s Search for a More Attractive Gun Rights Case; The next big Second Amendment case, after one on domestic violence, could be about whether the government can disarm a man who lied to get food stamps”: Adam Liptak will have this new installment of his “Sidebar” column in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: Via this link. The Court granted review in three new cases that will produce two hours of oral argument.

And in E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Abbott, No. 23–13, Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion dissenting from the denial of certiorari.

“A Code of Misconduct”: You can access today’s new episode of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast via this link.

“54. The Politics of the Justices’ Pensions: From Reconstruction through the New Deal, Congress regularly used its power over the justices’ pensions to incentivize or restrict judicial departures — and to otherwise exert leverage over the Court.” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

“The Law of Trump — Part I: How Trump opened up new frontiers of First Amendment law.” Adam Unikowsky has this post at his Substack site, “Adam’s Legal Newsletter.”