Thursday round-up

For The Washington Post (subscription required), Robert Barnes reports that in a public appearance yesterday at Georgetown Law with the Clintons, “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she knew there was concern about President Bill Clinton nominating a 60-year-old to the Supreme Court when he picked her in 1993”; “’If you worried about my age, it was unnecessary,’” she continued. At ABC News (via How Appealing), Devin Dwyer reports that Bill Clinton “revealed … that he openly discussed the issue of abortion” with Ginsburg before he appointed her. Ariane de Vogue reports at CNN that Hillary Clinton “admitted … that she had played a pivotal role in [her husband’s] decision” to choose Ginsburg.

Briefly:

• Greg Stohr reports at Bloomberg that “[t]he Trump administration [has] asked the U.S. Supreme Court to toss out a lawsuit by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac investors that challenged the federal government’s hoarding of almost all the mortgage giants’ profits.”
• At Bloomberg Environment (subscription required), Ellen Gilmer reports that “[t]he Supreme Court shouldn’t wade into a legal fight over state water permitting for hydroelectric dams and other energy projects, lawyers for the Trump administration said in a new filing.”
• In another post at Bloomberg Environment, Gilmer reports that “[i]n a new petition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service urged the justices to review a ruling from a lower court that required the agencies to turn over draft documents from an Endangered Species Act consultation process” under the Freedom of Information Act.
• At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie notes that “when the Supreme Court decided in June that it was ill-suited to policing partisan gerrymandering, Chief Justice John Roberts wove in a faint silver lining for fans of democracy” – lawsuits in state courts under state statutes and constitutions, and that a state court in North Carolina this week “effectively erased as a violation of North Carolina’s state constitution” “[t]he same skewed congressional map that the justices declined to straighten out in accordance with the federal constitution four months ago.”

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!