Friday round-up

The Supreme Court meets Friday morning for a private conference to discuss whether to add any new cases to its docket. Among the petitions slated for discussion is a case involving the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel for a person who was sentenced to death in Arizona, along with a pair of cases that involve the status of administrative law judges that adjudicate disability benefits under the Social Security Administration — specifically, what people seeking benefits need to do in order to mount a challenge arguing that their judge was not properly appointed under the Constitution’s appointments clause.

Here’s a round-up of other Supreme Court-related news and commentary from around the web:

• The Affordable Care Act Does Not Have An Inseverability Clause (Abbe Gluck, Take Care blog)
• Will the Supreme Court ride to Donald Trump’s rescue? Don’t count on it. (Richard Wolf, USA Today)
• Donald Trump goes to court (Steven Mazie, The Economist)
• A Way for the Supreme Court to Protect Religious Minorities (Asma Uddin & Howard Slugh, The New York Times)
• Are Foster Care Agencies Entitled To Religious Accommodation? (Walter Olson, Cato at Liberty)
• U.S. Supreme Court Considers Case at the Crossroads of Religious Freedom and LGBTQ Rights (Tony Mauro, Freedom Forum)

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, please send it to roundup@scotusblog.com. Thank you!