(Image
via
Getty)
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.
“Let’s
Not
Bring
Back
Jail
for
Swearing”: Online
at
The
New
York
Times,
law
professors Jacob
D.
Charles and Matthew
L.
Schafer have a
guest
essay
that
begins,
“With
its
new
term
starting
this
month,
the
Supreme
Court
will
likely
confront
calls
to
upend
constitutional
law
yet
again.
One
very
possible
target
is
people’s
everyday
right
to
voice
their
political
opinions,
to
speak
up,
even
just
to
swear.”
“J&J
Talc
Bankruptcy
Stays
in
Texas,
Boosting
Settlement
Odds;
J&J
beats
Justice
Department
bid
to
move
case
to
New
Jersey;
J&J
talc
bankruptcies
had
twice
been
stopped
in
New
Jersey”: Jonathan
Randles
and
Steven
Church
of
Bloomberg
News
has this
report.
“The
Anti-Abortion
Movement
Is
Pivoting
Back
to
Victimhood
at
the
Supreme
Court”: Sarah
Lipton-Lubet
has this
Jurisprudence
essay online
at
Slate.
“Why
the
Supreme
Court
May
Not
Decide
the
2024
Election
After
All”: Law
professor Richard
L.
Hasen —
founder
of
the
“Election
Law
Blog”
—
has this
Jurisprudence
essay online
at
Slate.
“US
sides
with
Ukraine
in
fight
with
Taliban
victims
over
$42
mln
from
Russian
bank”: Alison
Frankel’s
“On
the
Case”
from
Reuters
has this
post.
“The
Supreme
Court’s
Originalists
Are
Fundamentally
Wrong
About
History;
The
Founders
didn’t
believe
the
Constitution
had
a
fixed
meaning;
So
why
do
so
many
of
the
justices?” Andrew
Lanham
has this
essay online
at
The
New
Republic.