Tuesday round-up

At Constitution Daily, Lyle Denniston lays out the timeline and procedures by which the challenge to President Donald Trumps executive order temporarily barring entry into the United States of foreign nationals from six majority-Muslim countries could make its way before the Supreme Court. In The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that the presidents lawyers are likely to ask the high court this week to overturn the 4th Circuit opinion that left in place a lower court order blocking implementation of the travel ban; he observes that it is hardly clear how the Supreme Court will react to a case that mixes profound questions about the presidents power to protect the country, Congresss grant of authority to the executive branch to make immigration decisions and the Constitutions admonition that government not single out one religion for disparagement.

Briefly:

• At the Yale Journal on Regulations Notice and Comment blog, Bill Burgess looks atSAS Institute Inc. v. Lee,which involves inter partes review of patents before the Patent Trial and Appeals Board, a case the court added this week to its docket for next term, observing that SAScould turn out to be a big deal in administrative law, or it could be just another patent case, but that either way, SASs petition has already shown that taking shots atChevronmay be one way to get the Supreme Courts attention.
• Counting to 5 (podcast) looks at two cases that disappeared from the Courts docket without oral argument or a written opinion earlier this term.
• At Crime and Consequences, Kent Scheidegger comments on the execution last week of Alabama death-row inmate Thomas Arthur, who had filed a last-minute petition in the U.S. Supreme Court, after dodging seven prior execution dates.
• At Aeon, Tonja Jacobi and Dylan Schweers explain that their new researchon interruptions among justices during Supreme Court oral arguments indicates that women still do not have an equal opportunity to be heard in the highest court in the land.
• At Casetext, David Boyle explores the much-rumored possibility that Justice Anthony Kennedy is considering retirement, noting that taking a more cautious road by staying on for just a few more years, and then deciding whether to retire, is one nuanced and practical alternative for Kennedy.
• Stanford Law Schools Legal Aggregate blogfeatures a Q and A with voting rights and redistricting expert Professor Nate Persily on last weeks decision inCooper v. Harris, in which the justices upheld a lower courts ruling that North Carolina relied too heavily on race in drawing the boundaries of two congressional districts.
• The George Washington Law Reviews On the Docket offers analyses of several recent Supreme Court decisions: arbitration case Kindred Nursing Centers Limited Partnership v. Clark, here; patent-venue case TC Heartland LLP v. Kraft Food Group Brands LLP, here; and racial-gerrymandering case Cooper v. Harris, here.

Remember, we relyexclusivelyon our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, or op-ed relating to the Court that youd like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotus-blog.vipdev.lndo.site.