A Mississippi prosecutor’s unusual path to the U.S. Senate, questions about the reach of congressional investigations and a ruling involving SpaceX engineers are among the developments drawing attention across the legal world.

In Mississippi, Scott Colom is set to take the Senate seat in January currently held by Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith, who previously blocked his consideration for a federal judgeship. Hyde-Smith had opposed Colom’s path to a U.S. District Court vacancy in the state, The New York Times reported. His move to the Senate places him on the other side of the confirmation process that once stood in the way of his own judicial nomination.

The Supreme Court’s treatment of congressional investigative powers is also under scrutiny. In an installment of The New York Times’ “The Docket” newsletter, Adam Liptak examined whether the justices could hinder lawmakers’ investigations. The issues include immunity, legal standing and the requirement that an investigation have a “valid legislative purpose”—questions that can shape lawmakers’ ability to pursue information.

At the Justice Department, the midterm election has sharpened questions about staffing and the administration’s agenda. The New York Times reported that the department faces fresh fights over whether it can carry out President Donald Trump’s priorities as career officials consider leaving and senior officials resign.

The department’s challenges are unfolding alongside another judicial issue for the White House: resistance from within the Republican Party. The Associated Press reported that the administration faces an unusual obstacle in confirming Trump’s judicial nominees, with fellow Republicans complicating the effort.

In a separate workplace dispute, an appeals panel ruled that SpaceX engineers may pursue sexual harassment claims in court, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. The decision allows those claims to move forward in a judicial forum.

The developments were highlighted by Howard Bashman’s How Appealing, a blog devoted to appellate litigation. Together, they show how disputes over judicial appointments, institutional authority and access to courts continue to shape the legal landscape.