Supreme Court Declines Law School Name Case as Trump Loyalty Debate Over Future Picks Grows

The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear a challenge to a law school's name change, rejecting an appeal over what the school should be called. The dispute goes back to 1878, more than 145 years earlier, when Serranus Clinton Hastings, California's first chief justice, who made a small fortune from real estate ventures, agreed to fund a new law school.

Separately, supporters of Donald Trump's MAGA movement say they want a loyalist if he gets another Supreme Court appointment. For years, people hoping for a seat have avoided saying how they might rule, but Trump's frustrations with his first-term picks could change that. A Supreme Court history calendar entry for Oct. 30 also marked the birthday of President John Adams.

The Daily Signal, the right-leaning outlet, leads with the court's refusal to take the law school name case. It frames the story with the question of what a name is worth and spends its opening on Hastings, the 1878 funding and the real estate fortune. Its excerpt names no political figures. The New York Times, on the left, covers a different Supreme Court topic: the politics of a possible future vacancy. Its headline puts Trump and the MAGA demand for a loyalist up front, and its sub-headline stresses his frustration with his earlier appointees and the long habit of candidates not discussing how they would rule. Both treat the court as news but not the same event: one reports a decision to turn away a case, the other looks ahead to a possible nomination. Reason, the independent outlet, is distinct from both. It offers a dated historical note about Adams's birthday and gives no current news.