“Searching for news on RBG? YouTube offered conspiracy theories about the Supreme Court justice instead.” Tony Romm and Drew Harwell of The Washington Post have this report.

“Supreme Court Takes Eight Cases, but Doesn’t Act on Some Big Ones”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Access online the contents of the January 2019 issue of the Harvard Law Review: Via this link.

The issue contains law professor Jessica A. Clarke‘s article titled “They, Them, and Theirs.”

“U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on whether to release food stamp data to Argus Leader”: Jonathan Ellis of The Sioux Falls (S.D.) Argus Leader has this report, along with a related item headlined “How a South Dakota FOIA request landed in the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: At this link. The Court granted review in eight new cases.

“‘Swamp’ reigns in Mueller’s Trump-Russia probe”: Rowan Scarborough of The Washington Times has an article that begins, “The Trump-Russia investigation, with its dynamic cast of judges, defenders and prosecutors, can have the look of an exclusive club.”

“The journey from Wisconsin to Texas and the ruling that struck down the ACA”: Jenny Deam of The Houston Chronicle has an article that begins, “The federal judge who struck down the Affordable Care Act may sit in Texas, but the legal theory that started it all was hatched nearly a year earlier and a thousand miles away by a young, ambitious lawyer in Wisconsin. Early last January, Misha Tseytlin, then solicitor general of Wisconsin, was on the phone with his friend and fellow traveler in conservative political circles, Scott Keller, then solicitor general of Texas.”

“‘Smokescreen’ for abortion? Pro-life movement mobilizes to defeat revived Equal Rights Amendment; ERA clears first hurdle in Virginia state legislature.” Valerie Richardson has this front page article in today’s edition of The Washington Times.

“Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has no remaining cancer, Supreme Court announces”: Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has this report.

Adam Liptak of The New York Times reports that “Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is Cancer Free After Surgery, Supreme Court Says.”

Brent Kendall of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Miss Another Week of Proceedings; Supreme Court says recovery from cancer treatment remains on track.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Ginsburg to work from home for second straight week.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Ruth Bader Ginsburg shows ‘no evidence of remaining disease,’ Supreme Court says.”

Adam Shaw and Bill Mears of Fox News report that “Ginsburg to miss next week’s Supreme Court sessions, but recovery ‘on track.’”

And Dareh Gregorian of NBC News reports that “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will return to work, no further medical treatment needed; Ginsburg, 85, missed high court arguments for the first time in her 25 years in the Supreme Court this past week as she recuperates from cancer surgery.”

“Why Teaching English to Terrorists Is Not an Act of War: The legal options in this case of an American working with Islamic State lead to an unsatisfying answer.” Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“Experts Predict New SCOTUS Majority Will Take On Extreme Gerrymandering”: Allegra Kirkland of Talking Points Memo has this report.

“9th Circ. Tosses Suit Over ‘Useless’ Vitamin E Supplements”: Lauren Berg of Law360 has this report (subscription required for full access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday.

“Appeals court allows family to reinstate lawsuit over death of Susan Powell’s sons”: McKenzie Romero of The Deseret News has this report.

And Ben Winslow of Fox 13 in Salt Lake City reports that “Susan Cox Powell’s family wins appeal in lawsuit over the deaths of her children.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

“Court of Appeals: Governor can’t be sued over public defender caseloads.” Rudi Keller of The Columbia (Mo.) Daily Tribune has this report.

And Dan Margolies of KCUR Radio reports that “Missouri And Its Governor Can’t Be Sued For Public Defenders’ Funding Woes, Appeals Court Says.”

You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at this link.

Insane in the brain: In a decision issued yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit considered whether the plaintiff was entitled to tolling under a California law (since amended to exclude this language) that tolled the statute of limitations for a cause of action that accrued while the plaintiff was “insane.”

“Federal appeals court revives cell carrier T-Mobile’s lawsuit against Wilmington”: Jaci Smith of The Wilmington (Del.) News Journal has this article reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued yesterday.

“Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s cancer scare should not be used to require health screenings for judges; Pursuing untenable policies undergirded primarily by conjecture will not protect the court, or its elite jurists”: Jalal Baig has this essay online at NBC News.

The proposal is also troublesome for the stigma that would attach to those who did not meet the definition of “elite jurists.”

“Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s past comments raise questions about Supreme Court retirement”: Lukas Mikelionis of Fox News has this report.

And Tucker Higgins of CNBC reports that “Top cancer doctors expect Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg back on the bench by February.”

“Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s ‘Dissent Collar’ Is Being Reissued by Banana Republic; Half of the proceeds will be donated to he ACLU Women’s Rights Fund”: Chloe Foussianes of Town & Country has this report. For those hoping to nab one, it already appears to be too late.