“Will the Supreme Court stop Trump’s national emergency?” Priscilla Alvarez of CNN has this report.

“Trump Isn’t Just Defying the Constitution. He’s Undermining SCOTUS. The president defended his national emergency by boasting that he’ll win at the Supreme Court because it’s full of his judges.” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Judicial Statesmanship versus Judicial Fidelity”: At the “Law & Liberty” blog, John O. McGinnis has a post that begins, “It is commonly thought that Chief Justice John Roberts is very concerned about preserving the legitimacy of the Court in a polarized America. Many believe that as a result, he will become the Court’s balance, making sure it does not lurch too far right, which would supposedly dissipate its political capital.”

“Trump Said He ‘Didn’t Need’ To Declare An Emergency To Build The Wall And Liberal Lawyers Are Thrilled”: Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News has this report.

“Appeals court largely upholds Philadelphia win over Trump administration in sanctuary city case”: Jeff Gammage of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report.

Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Philadelphia beats U.S. appeal in sanctuary city case.”

And at his “CA3blog,” Matthew Stiegler has a post titled “Third Circuit rules against Trump administration in major sanctuary-cities appeal.”

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

“Where El Chapo Could End Up: A Prison ‘Not Designed for Humanity.'” Alan Feuer and Alan Blinder have this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.

“Federal Court Frees Fort Collins Nipples, U.S. Supreme Court May Be Next”: Michael Roberts of Westword has an article that begins, “By a 2-1 margin, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a Fort Collins ordinance making female toplessness a crime is unconstitutional.”

You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Free the Nipple v. City of Fort Collins at this link.

“Supreme Court to Hear Case on Census Citizenship Question”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court takes up Trump administration’s plan to ask about citizenship in census.”

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court will rule on Trump administration’s effort to add question on citizenship to 2020 Census.”

Brent Kendall and Janet Adamy of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Legality of Census Citizenship Question; The 10-year questionnaire to U.S. residents is used to allocate government funding and reshape the number of congressional seats.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Justices to decide if 2020 census can ask about citizenship.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court to decide legality of census citizenship query.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “High Court to Decide Trump’s Bid for Citizenship Query on Census.”

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court agrees to rule quickly on citizenship question on census; States, cities and immigration groups sued to prevent the Trump administration from asking over fears immigrants would be reluctant to respond.”

Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court agrees to take up 2020 census case.”

Brooke Singman of Fox News reports that “Supreme Court to decide whether citizenship question can be included in 2020 census.”

And Lydia Wheeler of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court to hear Census citizenship case this term.”

You can access today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court at this link. The order states that the case will be argued the second week of the Court’s April 2019 sitting.

Further proof that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg may, in fact, actually still be alive: Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Ruth Bader Ginsburg returns to Supreme Court.”

“Census Citizenship Case Pulls Supreme Court Into Political Fray”: Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News has this report.