Court Coverage in the era of Donald Trump and Neil Gorsuch

Graber writes that the Judiciary is covered the least of the three branhces. (268-269) Additionally, the media's coverage of the Court sees is fairly mediocre, even when it comes from otherwise reputable sources.

Currently, the top story on Justice Gorsuch, the newest member of the Supreme Court, is that he sold his $1.6M home.
Here: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/359422-gorsuchs-16m-home-in-colorado-gets-a-buyer
and here: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gorsuchs-16-million-colorado-home-has-a-buyer/article/2640040

Beyond stories that don't actually impact Justice Gorsuch's work as a judge, the other stories that have covered him since the confirmation hearings talk about how he relates to his colleagues, not his decisions.

Here: http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/08/politics/neil-gorsuch-john-roberts-rivalry/index.html
and here: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-badly-is-neil-gorsuch-annoying-the-other-supreme-court-justices
http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/12/a-ginsburg-gorsuch-rivalry-heating-up-on-scotus/

There is more coverage on Justice Gorsuch's sparring match with Justice Ginsberg (though such sparring is not uncommon in the Courts) than on his top rating from the ABA: https://www.americanbar.org/publications/governmental_affairs_periodicals/washingtonletter/2017/march/gorsuch.html
Moreover, during the confirmation hearings, a lot of the questioning focused on how Congress had handled/blocked President Obama's appointment in Merrick Garland. The media's coverage of the Court seldom has to do with the actual material of cases.

Even when the media does cover cases, its understanding of the case itself is mediocre at best.
Consider its coverage of the travel ban:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/29/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban.html

Compared to other coverage of the courts, this is quite good. However, the article somewhat misleads the reader into thinking that the Supreme Court approved of the travel ban, when it only agreed to review the case and still allowed people with a "bona fide" relationship to the U.S. as well as international students to enter the country. Even President Trump misunderstood what the Supreme Court was doing when he boasted about his "victory" on Twitter.

Finally, media happenings can impact Court proceedings. In the debate over whether Trump's travel ban was a ban on travel from specific countries (constitutional) or whether it was a ban on religious travel (not constitutional), President Trump calling the travel ban a "Muslim Ban" on Twitter ended up cited in Court.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-06-12/donald-trumps-statements-on-twitter-cited-in-courts-decision-to-upholds-block-on-travel-ban

The Court's role with the media is comparatively hazy because the Justices do not hold press conferences, do not allow reporters or their cameras inside their deliberations, and focus on more academically rigorous (and therefore less accessible) material.