In the latest edition of the How Appealing Weekly Roundup, several pivotal stories have emerged that capture the evolving landscape of U.S. law and its impact on society. From controversial deportations and congressional map battles to Supreme Court actions that may reshape longstanding legal precedents, the courts are buzzing with activity. Here's a closer look at some of the top stories featured this week.

Justice Department's Plans to Re-Deport Migrant Raises Questions

The Justice Department has indicated that the Trump administration plans to re-deport Abrego Garcia, a decision that has sparked significant controversy and raised questions about the administration's commitment to addressing criminal charges filed against migrants. According to a report by Alan Feuer of The New York Times, while a White House official has reiterated support for prosecuting Garcia in America, the move to deport him again underscores the complex intersection of immigration policy and criminal justice.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds Firm on Congressional Maps

In a decisive ruling, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has rejected a bid to reconsider the congressional maps set to be used before the 2026 midterm elections. Lawrence Andrea of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that this decision could have significant implications for future electoral processes in Wisconsin, highlighting the often contentious and politically charged nature of redistricting.

A Peek into Supreme Court's Less Visible Actions

The Supreme Court's operations are not always in the public eye, but a new episode of NPR’s “Throughline” podcast titled “What the Supreme Court Does in the Shadows” sheds light on the less visible aspects of the Court’s work. This behind-the-scenes exploration reveals how the Supreme Court's decisions and internal dynamics continue to shape major legal outcomes in the United States.

Trump’s Judicial Influence Continues with Appeals Court Nominee

The Senate Judiciary Panel has advanced President Trump's first nominee for the appeals court, signaling ongoing influence over the U.S. judicial system. Suzanne Monyak of Bloomberg Law provides an analysis of the nominee's potential impact on the appeals court and how it reflects broader trends in judicial appointments under the Trump administration.

Supreme Court Revives Archaic Sex-Discrimination Case

In a surprising turn, the Supreme Court has revisited a decades-old sex-discrimination case, Skrmetti, which was once thought to be a closed chapter in legal history. Leah Litman, a law professor, discusses in The Atlantic how this revival reflects the Court’s ongoing dialogue with its past decisions and the implications for contemporary issues of gender equality.

The Federalist Society's Enduring Influence on Judicial Nominations

Despite criticisms and challenges from various political figures, including Donald Trump, the Federalist Society remains a formidable force in shaping Republican judicial nominations. Hailey Fuchs and Daniel Barnes of Politico examine how this organization continues to wield significant influence in the selection and endorsement of judicial candidates.

Each of these stories highlights the dynamic and often contentious nature of legal interpretation, judicial influence, and the ongoing impact of the judiciary on American life. For more in-depth coverage and additional stories, visit Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog.