The Supreme Court of the United States today issued two decisions in argued cases: The Court today issued decisions in the following two cases —

1. In Medellin v. Texas, No. 06-984, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined. Justice John Paul Stevens issued an opinion concurring in the judgment. And Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined. You can access the opinion at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

2. And in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., No. 06-989, Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Thomas, Ginsburg, and Alito joined in full and in which Justice Scalia joined in large measure. Justice Stevens issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kennedy joined. And Justice Breyer also issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the opinion at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

In news coverage from The Associated Press, Mark Sherman reports that “Court Backs Texas in Dispute With Bush.” And Pete Yost reports that “High Court Rules in Arbitration Case.”

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post provides a news update headlined “Court Backs Texas in Dispute With Bush.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court rejects Bush’s claim on death cases; In a case that pitted the president against his home state of Texas, the high court rules that he does not have the authority to order new hearings for Mexican nationals.”

Dave Montgomery of McClatchy Newspapers has a report headlined “Supreme Court: Bush can’t order hearing for condemned Mexican.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Court rules against Bush, Mexican on death row.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. High Court Denies Hearing to Death Row Mexicans.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “States win over President on criminal law issue.”

“Court Overturns Air Passenger Rights Law”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down a state law requiring airlines to give food, water, clean toilets and fresh air to passengers stuck in delayed planes, saying the measure was well-intentioned but stepped on federal authority. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said New York’s law – the first of its kind in the country – interferes with federal law governing the price, route or service of an air carrier.”

You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.

Programming note: I will be in court today on a client matter. “SCOTUSblog” will provide timely coverage of any opinions that the U.S. Supreme Court issues today.

“2 opposing views of cyclist in BALCO case”: Lance Williams has this article today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“At Supreme Court: Americans accused in Iraq want U.S. judge; Key issue: Do citizens held by the US military in a foreign war have constitutional protections?” Warren Richey has this article today in The Christian Science Monitor.

Today in USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Justices to hear dispute on U.S. citizens captured in Iraq; Two men seek court access to challenge their detention.”

And Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Americans Held in Iraq Head to Court.”

“Justices to Weigh Search and Consent”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

And today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court allows retiree benefit cuts; Employers may coordinate with Medicare on healthcare provisions for seniors; An AARP legal challenge is turned away.”

Available online from law.com: An article is headlined “9th Circuit: County Can’t Use RICO to Sue Companies for Hiring Illegal Aliens.”

Shannon P. Duffy has an article headlined “3rd Circuit: Final Judgment No Prerequisite for Attorney Fees.”

And in other news, “11th Circuit Demands Sanctions in Libel Suit; Panel says district judge erred in not sanctioning the plaintiffs in their failed suit.”