“Health Law Puts Focus on Limits of Federal Power”: Adam Liptak will have this article Monday in The New York Times.

And Michael Doyle and David Lightman of McClatchy Newspapers report that “Supreme Court prepares to take on health care law challenges.”

“Who gets to judge political truth?” Today in The Washington Post, columnist George F. Will has an op-ed that begins, “The Stolen Valor Act of 2005, a compound of political pandering and moral exhibitionism, was whooped through the Senate, a.k.a. the ‘world’s greatest deliberative body,’ by unanimous consent; the House, joining the stampede, passed it by a voice vote. So Xavier Alvarez now hopes the Supreme Court will save him from punishment for lying. And his is not the only case arising from government supervising speech that is demonstrably, or arguably, inaccurate.”

“The Supreme Court has a chance to keep Big Brother at bay”: Law professor David Cole has this op-ed today in The Washington Post.

Also today in The Washington Post, law professor Jonathan Turley has an op-ed entitled “Supreme Court’s GPS case asks: How much privacy do we expect?”

And online at the Harvard Political Review, Alex McLeese has an essay entitled “The Court, Privacy, and GPS Tracking.”

“What does Supreme Court decision on Social Security mean for health-care act?” Robert Barnes will have this article Monday in The Washington Post.

And from Bloomberg News, law professor Noah Feldman has an op-ed entitled “Conservative Health-Care Split Offers Supreme Court a Path.”

“Under the U.S. Supreme Court: Unveiling secret corporate political money.” Michael Kirkland of UPI has this report.

“Despite title, Supreme Court not always last word”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.