In this week’s edition of the “How Appealing Weekly Roundup,” we delve into a variety of intriguing legal stories that have captured the attention of the legal community, each highlighting the complex interplay between law, policy, and society.

Unsolicited Appointment? Trump’s Appellate Court Pick Surprises Tiana Headley of Bloomberg Law sheds light on Jennifer Mascott, whose nomination to a federal appeals court in Delaware was unexpected, given her limited connections to the state. Her journey to the bench began not from a specific desire to serve in Delaware but from a broader willingness to serve wherever the White House deemed fit. This story raises questions about the processes and criteria behind judicial nominations at such high levels.

The Pro Bono Conundrum: Law Firms and Trump’s Deals A fascinating report by Erin Mulvaney, C. Ryan Barber, and Jess Bravin from The Wall Street Journal explores how different law firms have responded to their commitments with the Trump administration. While some leaders dismissed these deals as unenforceable, others quietly proceeded to fulfill them, particularly in regards to trade work, revealing a split in ethical and business considerations within prestigious law firms.

Ghislaine Maxwell’s Supreme Court Challenge In an insightful essay for The New Yorker, Law Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen discusses Ghislaine Maxwell’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. Maxwell, a convicted sex offender, is questioning whether an agreement made with one federal prosecutor is binding nationwide, a legal dilemma that could have significant implications for the justice system.

Trump’s Influence on Trade and Law Firms Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman of The New York Times report on how personal lawyer Boris Epshteyn linked law firms Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden Arps to the Commerce Department to assist with trade deals. This connection underscores the ongoing intersections of legal practice and federal policy under Trump’s influence.

Should Supreme Court Justices Profit from Publishing? Maris Kreizman, writing for Literary Hub, poses a provocative question about the ethics of Supreme Court justices earning millions from book deals. She explores the potential conflicts of interest such scenarios could create, especially when cases related to the publishing industry might come before the Court.

DOJ’s Broad Legal Action Against Maryland Judges Salvador Rizzo of The Washington Post details a controversial lawsuit by the Trump administration against every U.S. District Court judge in Maryland. The administration alleges that these judges have obstructed efforts to rapidly deport migrants, a sweeping legal move that has stirred skepticism and concern among legal experts about its implications on judicial independence.

Each of these stories not only informs but also challenges us to think critically about the structures of power and law that shape American society. For further details on these compelling legal narratives, visit Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog.