Or as the USA Today crudely puts it, "Supreme Court snubs Trump, keeps DACA immigration program in place for now."

The Supreme Court did what the NYT applied pressure on it to do, as we discussed here. I took a middle position:

The Solicitor General, seeking to skip over the intermediate appellate court, is perhaps overdramatizing the need for quick action, but [Linda] Greenhouse is overdramatizing the consequence for the Court if the supposedly big-deal case turns into nothing [because of congressional action].

I think she knows this, as she asks: "Will it look that way from inside the justices’ private conference?" She says she doesn't know, but I think it's pretty clear the answer is no. She purports to be sure that "The future of more than the Dreamers is at stake." That's the last line of the column. It's clear that she means that the future of the Court is at stake, but in what way?