Good morning and welcome to Supreme Court Brief. The Alito draft opinion overruling Roe v. Wade continues to generate widespread discussion. We spoke with Aaron Tang of UC Davis about his fact checking of Justice Alito's historical research and his harsh judgment of the justice's results. Work continues on next term's cases and one of the biggest–the challenge to admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina–is well underway with the filing of the merits briefs and 34 amicus briefs. We take a quick look at some of the amicus parties–both new and familiar faces. And for more fallout from the Alito draft opinion, scroll down.

Thanks for reading. We welcome feedback and tips. Contact Marcia Coyle at [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @MarciaCoyle. 

Justice Samuel Alito. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM

Fact Checking Alito

Last fall when Mississippi made clear that it wanted the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and not just defend its 15-week abortion ban, Aaron Tang of the University of California, Davis, School of Law, became interested in the historical evidence that the state was citing for its position against an abortion right.

"I just wanted to fact check it," he recalled. That fact check led him into abortion's history at the nation's founding, and in common law before the founding. And when the first draft opinion overruling Roe was leaked, it drew him even deeper into fact-checking Justice Samuel Alito Jr., the draft's author.