Ed. Note: A weekly roundup of just a few items from Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog, the Web’s first blog devoted to appellate litigation. Check out these stories and more at How Appealing.
“James Ho Understands What Trump Wants In a Supreme Court Justice; Getting on this White House’s Supreme Court shortlist is a matter of showing that you will be loyal to the president above all else”: Jay Willis has this essay online at Balls and Strikes.
LexisNexis’ Practical Guidance Is Every Attorney’s Essential Concierge
This tool will — seamlessly and authoritatively — take you from initial research to final draft in just about any practice scenario.
“Ed Martin’s failed bid for U.S. attorney revealed the limits of Trump’s power; The unsuccessful nomination revealed a shifting relationship between the president and GOP senators — and Trump’s willingness to walk away from a protracted fight”: Martine Powers and Spencer S. Hsu of The Washington Post have this report.
“Supreme Court Lets Trump, for Now, Remove Agency Leaders; An appeals court previously ruled that a key 1935 precedent, long in the cross hairs of the conservative legal movement, meant the officials could keep their jobs”: Adam Liptak and Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times have this report.
“Deadlocked Supreme Court Rejects Bid for Religious Charter School in Oklahoma; In a 4-to-4 decision, the court upheld a ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court that blocked the school”: Abbie VanSickle and Sarah Mervosh of The New York Times have this report.
“Trump 2.0 and the Supreme Court Reform Debate; Does the left’s turn to the courts in response to the Second Trump Administration’s excesses show advocates of structural reform of the Supreme Court were wrong?” Dan Epps has this post at the “Divided Argument” Substack site.
Your Law Firm’s Website Is Failing You.
Here’s What The Best Ones Are Doing Differently.
“SCOTUS Is About to Suffer Buyers Remorse, Again: They decided to tackle the very messy question of nationwide injunctions instead of answering the easy, obviously unconstitutional issue.” You can access the new episode of Slate’s “Amicus” podcast via this link