Paul Krugman: “By any reasonable standard, most of Trump’s tariffs are plainly illegal. Two lower courts have ruled against them. The Trump administration appealed those decisions, and in early November the Supreme Court heard arguments on the case. Many businesses that have found it impossible to make long-term plans with the fate of the Trump tariffs in limbo eagerly awaited the Court’s ruling.”

“They’re still waiting. And I can’t see any plausible explanation for the delay other than Supreme cowardice.”

“In November of 2024, two weeks after voters returned President Donald Trump to office, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. summoned employees of the U.S. Supreme Court for an unusual announcement. Facing them in a grand conference room beneath ornate chandeliers, he requested they each sign a nondisclosure agreement promising to keep the court’s inner workings secret,” the New York Times reports.

“The chief justice acted after a series of unusual leaks of internal court documents, most notably of the decision overturning the right to abortion, and news reports about ethical lapses by the justices. Trust in the institution was languishing at a historic low. Debate was intensifying over whether the black box institution should be more transparent.”

“Instead, the chief justice tightened the court’s hold on information. Its employees have long been expected to stay silent about what they witness behind the scenes. But starting that autumn, in a move that has not been previously reported, the chief justice converted what was once a norm into a formal contract.”

Salt Lake Tribune: “After filling the two new seats, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox will have appointed five of the seven justices.”

“In addition to dealing the Legislature a crushing blow in the redistricting challenge, the courts have, in recent years, blocked Utah’s ban on most abortions, temporarily stopped a law banning transgender girls from playing high school sports, and found the state’s school voucher program unconstitutional.”

The Supreme Court didn’t rule on President Trump’s tariffs Tuesday, meaning it probably will be at least another month before a challenge to his signature economic policy is resolved, Bloomberg reports.

“The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Tuesday seemed inclined to uphold a pair of state laws barring the participation of transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports teams,” the New York Times reports.

“During more than three hours of lively discussion, the justices grappled with concerns about fairness, scientific uncertainty and discrimination and seemed divided along ideological lines.”

Duncan Hosie: “Two dynamics are fundamentally reshaping the structure and functioning of the American government. The first, which is quite well known, is Congress’s decline. The second, perhaps somewhat less appreciated but no less significant, is the Supreme Court’s ascent—its expansion of its power into areas previously thought to be off-limits.”

“These dynamics share a root cause: the partisan polarization that has reshaped American politics over the past four decades. But the connection is deeper and more complex than that. Whereas polarization weakened Congress, it emboldened the Court to dismantle laws and, in the process, undermine Congress’s ability to make laws at all, reinforcing Congress’s sclerosis.”

“The Supreme Court could reshape U.S. elections for years to come as it hears a number of cases with implications for the country’s political landscape,” The Hill reports.

“In perhaps the most high-stakes example, the country is waiting to see whether the justices decide to weaken a section of the Voting Rights Act.”

“Other rulings expected this year could alter how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates or affect the deadline for casting ballots on time.”

“The U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule on challenges to President Donald Trump’s tariffs Friday, leaving markets in suspense on the fate of the administration’s signature economic policy,” Bloomberg reports.

“The court hasn’t said when it will issue its next opinion but could schedule more releases in the next two weeks.”

“With the US Supreme Court poised to decide the fate of most of President Donald Trump’s tariffs as soon as Friday, hundreds of companies already are lined up hoping to recoup their share of the billions of dollars in duties paid so far,” Bloomberg reports.

“After months on the sidelines, a flood of businesses spanning the global economy sued in the weeks since the justices signaled skepticism of Trump’s signature trade policy during a Nov. 5 hearing. More than 1,000 corporate entities are now involved in the legal fight, court records show, teeing up an unprecedented struggle over what happens next if the administration loses.”

“The U.S. Supreme Court scheduled Friday as an opinion day, indicating that date will be the first chance for a ruling on President Trump’s global tariffs,” Bloomberg reports.

“The court never says in advance which decisions are ready for release, only that rulings in argued cases are possible when the justices take the bench at 10:00 a.m. Washington time. A tariff decision is a possibility given the court’s expedited handling of the case so far.”

“A ruling against Trump on tariffs would undercut his signature economy policy and deliver his biggest legal defeat since returning to the White House.”

“In the face of an effort to impeach her and remove her from the bench, Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan announced she is resigning,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports.

“The announcement came on Jan. 3, weeks after a federal jury found Dugan guilty of obstructing federal immigration agents seeking to make an arrest outside her courtroom.”