Friday round-up

Briefly: 

• In an op-ed for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse considers what the justices’ recent refusal to hear “appeals by two states that had tried to terminate Planned Parenthood’s status as a Medicaid provider” “impli[es] for the future of the Roberts court.”
• At the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, Daryl Joseffer and Ashley Parrish write that Frank v. Gaos, in which the court has been asked to make it harder for companies to settle class-action lawsuits without providing direct compensation to class members, through a process known as cy pres, “provides an ideal opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify the essential requirements for standing in class actions while also reducing the use of cy pres settlements.”
• At Law360 (subscription required), Keith Bradley maintains that the court’s decision in Endangered Species Act case Weyerhaeuser Company v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service “reclaims judicial authority over agency decision-making that had been eroding,” by providing “crucial instructions to federal courts about the availability of judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act.”
• At The Daily Signal, Elizabeth Slattery offers gift suggestions for court-watchers.

We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!