“Supreme Court president pleads with Netanyahu not to endanger democracy; The Israeli public believes if the Supreme Court is denied the capacity to strike down laws enacted by the Knesset, there will be no checks on the government and it will have unlimited power”: Gil Hoffman of The Jerusalem Post has this report.

“Texas’ Voter ID Law Does Not Discriminate and Can Stand, Appeals Panel Rules”: Manny Fernandez of The New York Times has this report.

Jonathan Tilove of The Austin American-Statesman reports that “Federal appeals court upholds Texas voter ID law.”

Jeremy Wallace of The Houston Chronicle reports that “5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals OK’s Texas voter ID law.”

Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reports that “Federal appeals court restores Texas voter-ID law.”

Paul J. Weber of The Associated Press reports that “Court upholds Texas’ law in another big voter ID ruling.”

Jon Herskovitz of Reuters reports that “U.S. appeals court allows Texas to implement voter ID law.”

Laurel Brubaker Calkins of Bloomberg News reports that “Texas Voter ID Law Survives Appeals Court After State Tweaks.”

Nicole Chavez of CNN reports that “Texas voter ID law can go into effect, appeals court panel rules.”

Josh Gerstein of Politico has a blog post titled “Appeals court overturns ruling against revised Texas voter ID law.”

Alexa Ura of The Texas Tribune reports that “Federal appellate court upholds embattled Texas voter ID law.”

And Cameron Langford of Courthouse News Service reports that “Fifth Circuit Upholds Texas Voter ID Law.”

You can access Friday’s ruling of a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in which each of the three judges on the panel wrote separately, at this link.

“Trump’s travel-ban comments ‘crystal-clear’? Likely depends on the beholder.” Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

“Immigration, gay rights, politics, abortion, taxes, technology: Crunch time at the Supreme Court.” Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

“Supreme Court sports-betting ruling to have limited Nevada impact”: Richard N. Velotta and Todd Prince have this front page article in today’s edition of The Las Vegas Review-Journal.

“Hennepin County attorney joins wife in arguing in front of U.S. Supreme Court; Dan Rogan appeared before the high court in February, two years after wife Kate Menendez did so”: Trevor Squire of The Minneapolis Star Tribune has an article that begins, “As law students at New York University, Dan Rogan and Kate Menendez would take walks around Greenwich Village and Central Park to decompress from the strain of their studies. Like many of their classmates and colleagues, they dreamed of one day arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court, a goal to which many attorneys aspire but few achieve.”