Wednesday round-up

Briefly:

• Greg Stohr reports at Bloomberg that, [a]s mass shootings revive the U.S. debate over gun policy, the Supreme Court is weighing whether to go forward with a Second Amendment showdown for the first time in a decade.
• At Politico Magazine, Renato Mariotti notes that an important strand of the debate [over gun control] has now landed in the Supreme Court: Last week, the gun-maker Remington asked the Supreme Court to overturn a Connecticut decision that gave Sandy Hook families the ability to sue the company over the way it marketed the weapon used in the 2012 school massacre.
• For The Daily Caller, Kevin Daley reports that Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee asked the National Archives Tuesday to release documents from Justice Brett Kavanaughs service in the George W. Bush White House.
• At Slate, Paul Horvitz takes issue with a recent ruling by a judicial panel dismissing misconduct complaints against Kavanaugh.

• Subscript Law offers a graphic explainer for Kahler v. Kansas, in which the justices will decide whether the Constitution requires states to make the insanity defense available.
• At The World and Everything In It, Mary Reichard highlights two opinions [from last term] that had interesting aspects or unexpected coalitions between the conservative and liberal leaning justices.
• At Law360 (subscription required), Sarah Martinson reports that [t]he parents of a Mexican teen fatally shot by a U.S. border agent asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to set the record straight about when victims can collect damages for the unlawful actions of federal agents in Hernandez v. Mesa, which the justices will decide next term.

We relyon 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 youd like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotus-blog.vipdev.lndo.site. Thank you!