“Court to hear case on executions today: Suit challenges doctors’ roles in lethal injections.” This article appears today in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“Fewer Cases Cite Harvard Law Review”: The Harvard Crimson today contains an article that begins, “Harvard Law School may dominate the Supreme Court with five alums on the bench, but a new study suggests Harvard is losing its grip on one corner of the legal establishment. The Harvard Law Review is cited less and less in decisions by federal courts, in keeping with a trend across several major law reviews, according to a study published last month by staff at the Cardozo Law Review of Yeshiva University.”

“Judge rules fired Zamboni driver can’t be charged with DWI”: The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contains this article today.

And The Associated Press provides a report headlined “N.J. Judge: No Such Thing As Zamboni DWI.”

“Relatives of Interned Japanese-Americans Side With Muslims”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

In Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times: An article headlined “Bush Splits With Congress and States on Emissions” begins, “A day after the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases, President Bush said he thought that the measures he had taken so far were sufficient.”

In other news, “8-Month Jail Term Ends as Maker of Video Turns Over a Copy.”

And an article will report that “Democrats Seek to Interview Gonzales Aide.”

“Justices Thwart Bush Team on Environmental Policy”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“Duke Energy loss could cost millions”: The Charlotte Observer today contains an article that begins, “A U.S. Supreme Court ruling Monday could mean Duke Energy is subjected to a more expensive interpretation of the Clean Air Act — potentially costing the company millions to retrofit older plants in the Carolinas with anti-pollution devices.”

“The main question presented in these cross-appeals is the contention of the government that John Windell Clay’s 60-month sentence for possessing methamphetamine precursors is unreasonably lenient, when the advisory Guidelines range was 188 to 235 months and the variance was based primarily on Clay’s postoffense rehabilitation.” On behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Circuit Judge William H. Pryor, Jr. holds that the sentence imposed was not unreasonably lenient in an opinion issued today.

At the “Sentencing Law and Policy” blog, Law Professor Douglas A. Berman has this post about the ruling.

“Imprisoned freelance journalist released”: Bob Egelko and Jim Herron Zamora of The San Francisco Chronicle provide a news update that begins, “Josh Wolf, the blogger whose record 7 1/2 months in federal prison stirred debate about who qualifies as a journalist and what legal protections they should receive, was freed today after releasing video footage sought by prosecutors about an anarchist protest.”

And David Kravets of The Associated Press reports that “Journalist Jailed for Record Time Freed.”

“Supreme Court refuses to hear Guantanamo detainees’ case — for now; The justices vote 6-3 against hearing prisoners’ claim that they are being denied the right to habeas corpus that is protected by the Constitution”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports today that “Justices reject appeals at Guantanamo — for now; Majority signal court may intervene later.”

And The Washington Times reports that “High court rejects challenge of detainees at Guantanamo.”

“Justices push EPA to act on car emissions; The court ruling scolds the Bush administration for refusing to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times. A related article is headlined “Emissions law could still face hurdles; Despite a favorable Supreme Court ruling, another suit, the EPA or Congress could still stymie state legislation.” And an editorial is entitled “Supreme Court clears the air: The high court ruled in favor of California and 11 other states on limiting greenhouse-gas emissions.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports today that “Stricter emission limits get a boost; EPA has regulatory power over greenhouse gases, Supreme Court ruling says.”

The Boston Globe reports that “High court tells EPA to rethink policy on emissions; Mass. led case against agency.” And an editorial is entitled “Court tells Bush to cool it.”

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Ruling helps California battle global warming; Supreme Court affirms that states can limit greenhouse gases, attorney general says.”

The Chicago Tribune contains articles headlined “EPA must regulate greenhouse gases” and “Legislation to curb emissions crowds agendas.”

The Hartford Courant reports that “Court’s Climate Ruling Hailed; May Help States Fight Greenhouse Emissions.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that “Industries Show Uncertainty Over Ruling’s Impact; Some Favor Regulation From Congress, Others From Federal Agencies” (free access).

The New York Times contains an editorial entitled “The Court Rules on Warming.”

And The Washington Post contains an editorial entitled “Regulating Emissions: Cleaner air, compliments of the Supreme Court.”

“U.S. Stance in Spy Case Sparks Concern in Academia”: Josh Gerstein has this article today in The New York Sun.

“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Undercuts Sexual Harassment Victims’ Rights: How the Decision Underlines Problems with the Supreme Court’s Approach To Hostile Environment Harassment.” Joanna Grossman has this essay online today at FindLaw.