“Supreme Court Takes Up New Cases on Partisan Gerrymandering”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court to hear cases on partisan gerrymandering.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court to decide on partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina and Maryland.”

Brent Kendall and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Again to Consider Partisan Gerrymandering; High court will hear cases from North Carolina, Maryland after disposing of two other cases last term on procedural grounds.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court agrees to wade into politically explosive issue of election maps drawn for partisan advantage.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court to take up partisan gerrymandering, again.”

In today’s edition of The Baltimore Sun, Luke Broadwater and Pamela Wood have a front page article headlined “U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Maryland, North Carolina cases on congressional district boundaries.”

In today’s edition of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina, Will Doran has a front page article headlined “Supreme Court will hear NC gerrymandering case soon, potentially breaking new legal ground.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “High court to take new look at partisan electoral districts.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. top court takes up politically charged electoral map disputes.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court to Weigh Barring Challenges to Partisan Gerrymanders.”

Ariane de Vogue and Sophie Tatum of CNN report that “Supreme Court will hear partisan gerrymandering cases in March.”

Steven Shepard of Politico reports that “Supreme Court to take on partisan gerrymandering this year; The court will hear arguments over congressional maps in Maryland and North Carolina that lower courts have struck down.”

Lydia Wheeler of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court to take up gerrymandering cases.”

And Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed News reports that “The Supreme Court Will, Again, Consider If Redistricting Decisions Can Be So Partisan That They’re Illegal.”

“The Latest Front Against Civil Rights: The law of ‘disparate impact’ isn’t broken; There’s no need for Donald Trump to rewrite it.” This editorial appears in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Supreme Court to decide if trademark protection can be denied to ‘scandalous’ brands”: Robert Barnes has this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court agrees to hear Trump administration’s effort to restrict vulgar trademarks.”

Jan Wolfe of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court to hear challenge to ban on profane trademarks.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Vulgar Trademarks Get U.S. Supreme Court Review in Speech Clash.”

And at the “THR, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner had a post titled “F-Bombs Coming to Supreme Court for Review of Government Ban on Scandalous Trademarks; It’s now time for the nine justices to hear about the ‘FUCT’ clothing brand.”