Monday round-up

Briefly:

• At The Oklahoman (via How Appealing), Chris Casteel reports that in a brief filed last week in McGirt v. Oklahoma, a jurisdiction dispute over a crime committed on Creek Nation territory, “Oklahoma inmate” Jimcy McGirt “told justices that the state is exaggerating the potential impact of returning some authority to the Creeks.”
• At Law360 (subscription or registration required), Blaine Evanson and Jeremy Christiansen explore the “broader impact” of last term’s decision in Rimini Street v. Oracle USA on “the ongoing vitality of staunch yet nuanced textualism in federal statutory interpretation and [the] recovery of litigation expenses in any number of fields beyond copyright.”
• At Quartz, Ephrat Livni suggests that the Trump administration’s arguments during the impeachment trial as well as in briefs filed last week in two cases regarding subpoenas for the president’s tax returns mesh with the administration’s strategy of “actively, and so far pretty successfully, promoting an expansive view of the president’s powers in every branch of government.”
• At Bloomberg Law (via How Appealing), Kimberly Robinson reports that guidance issued by the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, although not altering court procedure, attempts “to formalize previously unwritten rules for lawyers” regarding “scheduling at the justices’ private conferences and requests for Supreme Court review, known as petitions for certiorari.”
• In a review at Law360, Ryan Davis concludes that the dearth of legal discussion in a new documentary on Justice Clarence Thomas, “Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words,” is “a distinct missed opportunity, not only because [Thomas’] work as a judge is the main reason he’s worth making a movie about, but also since his current views often seem so at odds both with those of his younger self, and with his colleagues on the court, even fellow conservatives.”

We rely on 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, podcast or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!