“Justices Take on Case of Ga. Lawyer’s Drug Search”: law.com provides this report.

“An Introduction to the Italian Constitutional Court”: Princeton University has posted online Samuel A. Alito, Jr.’s senior thesis.

In news coverage, The Daily Princetonian offers an update headlined “Alito’s thesis offers few clues to his judicial philosophy.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Case Asks if Senator Can Also Be a Judge” and “Kan. School Board OKs Evolution Language.”

Access online the American Constitution Society‘s recent panel discussion on the Alito nomination: A transcript is here, and you can view video of the event here (RealPlayer required).

“Court weighs household privacy”: Lyle Denniston at “SCOTUSblog” offers this post on today’s oral argument.

“Alito repudiated speech code”: Law Professor Robert M. O’Neil has this essay online at the First Amendment Center.

And David L. Hudson Jr. has an essay entitled “Alito has history of rejecting prisoner First Amendment claims.”

“Legal Pressure Shutters Grokster; Recording Industry Cheers Move”: This article appears today in The Washington Post.

The New York Times reports today that “Grokster Calls It Quits on Sharing Music Files.”

The Wall Street Journal today contains an article headlined “For Grokster, It’s the Day the Music Died” (temporary free access).

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Grokster Surrenders to Labels.”

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Grokster settles industry lawsuit; File-sharing firm to pay $50 million, stop distribution.”

The San Jose Mercury News contains articles headlined “Grokster shut down, plans legal service” and “Hollywood breathes sigh of relief over Grokster’s demise, settlement,” along with an editorial entitled “Grokster: gone but not forgotten.”

And The New York Daily News reports that “It’s curtains for Grokster.”

“‘The Ketchup Song,’ The Next Craze”? Whether or not this “next craze” evaded your notice, the song makes a comeback today as the central focus of this ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

First Circuit affirms federal district court’s decision denying preliminary injunction against Maine’s Unfair Prescription Drug Practices Act: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit at this link.

“Suit filed over rules barring judicial candidates’ commentary; Lifting of rules sought in suit”: Late last month, The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania published an article that begins, “A federal judge is considering a request by a conservative family values group to lift the rules that bar Pennsylvania judicial candidates from commenting on issues.” And in other coverage, The Associated Press late last month reported that “Group sues over rules for judicial candidates’ speech.”

Last Friday, Senior U.S. District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo of the Middle District of Pennsylvania rejected the lawsuit on standing and ripeness grounds. Her opinion can be accessed here.

“Supreme Court Considers Police Searches”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Court questions searches when spouses disagree.”

In earlier coverage, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports today that “Search case in U.S. high court today; 2001 incident at Americus home at issue.”

And The Augusta Chronicle reported yesterday that “Two Georgia cases could clarify rules.”

Tax law nerds say enough with Planned Parenthood v. Casey; Where does Alito stand on Commissioner v. Casey? Via “TaxProf Blog,” you can access online Lee A. Sheppard’s news analysis headlined “The Tax Opinions of Judge Alito.”

“Welcome to no-choice America: PBS’s Frontline special ‘The Last Abortion Clinic‘ shows us why the dark ages of illegal abortions and unwanted children are already here.” At Salon.com, Heather Havrilesky has this essay today.

The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi today contains an article headlined “Jackson facility focus of documentary; ‘Frontline’ examines state’s anti-abortion movement, effects.”

And The Boston Globe contains a review headlined “‘Clinic’ looks at abortion battle from both sides.”

“Senators Say Alito Respects Roe Decision”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

CORRECTION! The Daily Princetonian article that I linked to here earlier this morning now has the following correction appended to it:

The original article mistakenly reported that Walter Murphy said he and Alito agreed that Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion-rights case, was wrongly decided. The error was a result of a misinterpretation of an earlier quote. In an interview Tuesday morning, Murphy said: “Sam and I have never talked about Roe v. Wade, that I recall.”

In the correction, however, Professor Murphy does not renounce the following passage:

“Sam is his own man,” Murphy said. “He’ll never be ‘Scalito.’ And then it’s a gross insult to say in the mold of [other conservative and constructionist justice] Clarence Thomas. Their IQs are so radically different … We’re not talking about someone in Sam’s intellectual league.”

Professor Murphy reserves the right to insult additional Justices as the confirmation process proceeds.

“Found: Sam Alito finally turns in his thesis.” Bruce Reed has this post online at Slate’s “The Has-Been.”

“The Last Abortion Clinic”: That’s the title of tonight’s broadcast of the PBS program “Frontline.” You can view a video preview by clicking here (Windows Media Player).

“Falwell, Liberty Counsel say Specter broke promise”: The News & Advance of Lynchburg, Virginia yesterday contains an article that begins, “The Rev. Jerry Falwell and Liberty Counsel President Mat Staver on Monday said U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., broke a promise to conservatives by allowing the confirmation hearings for Samuel Alito Jr. to be delayed until Jan. 9.”

“High Court Backs Workers in Pay Dispute”: The Associated Press provides this report.

The U.S. Supreme Court today issued opinions in two cases. In IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, No. 03-1238, Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion on behalf of a unanimous Court. And in United States v. Olson, No. 04-759, Justice Stephen G. Breyer delivered the opinion on behalf of a unanimous Court.

“Disabled Prisoners at Issue in High Court”: The Associated Press provides this report.

And, according to Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog,” the U.S. Supreme Court today issued its first opinions in argued cases this Term.

Available online from National Public Radio: Yesterday evening’s broadcast of “All Things Considered” contained segments entitled “High Court to Hear Challenge to Military Tribunals” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Samuel Alito Prepares for Confirmation Hearings“; and “Closing Arguments Begin in Florida Terrorism Trial.”

And yesterday’s broadcast of “Day to Day” contained a segment entitled “Slate’s Moneybox: Sam Alito, Financial Whiz.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Conservatives trying to split 9th Circuit”: The Sacramento Bee contains this article today.

“Prosecutor: Al-Arian jurors must infer links; She says ‘common sense’ connects Sami Al-Arian and others to financial support of PIJ violence.” This article appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.

The Tampa Tribune today reports that “Al-Arian Likened To Don In Mafia.”

And in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein has an article headlined “‘Professor by Day, Terrorist by Night.’”

“Alito as judge: Paid speech is also free speech.” Bruce E.H. Johnson has this essay online at the First Amendment Center.

The First Amendment Center also lists “17 First Amendment per curiam opinions” in which Circuit Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. was on the panel — a list that includes a victory for a client of mine in a pro bono appointment that I accepted from the Third Circuit.

“Nominee’s missing thesis recovered; Alito ’72 believes Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, adviser says”: The Daily Princetonian contains this article today.

The New York Times today contains an article headlined “Interlocking Friendships Connect a Chairman and a Nominee.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports today that “Specter in the hot seat on Alito.”

The Newark Star-Ledger reports that “Strategists strive for ways to sway decision on Alito.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer contains an article headlined “Brown’s Alito letter lifted from blogger” that begins, “Rep. Sherrod Brown wrote to Sen. Mike DeWine last Friday, voicing concern about Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito’s labor record. Brown’s language was crisp — and was plagiarized.”

And The Billings Gazette reports that “Racicot gives backing to Alito.”

In commentary, The Chicago Sun-Times contains an op-ed by columnist Jesse Jackson entitled “Alito’s dangerous activism.”

The Houston Chronicle contains an editorial entitled “Early scrutiny focused on judge’s abortion stance, but a conflict of interest might prove more troubling.”

In The Providence (R.I.) Journal, Hilary Cosell has an op-ed entitled “Alito will overturn Roe v. Wade.”

In The Washington Times, Bruce Fein has an op-ed entitled “Genuine turning point.”

And The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette contains an editorial entitled “To filibuster or not to filibuster: That is the question….”

“2 Protesters Arrested After Going Topless; The Breasts Not Bombs members had been warned to keep their shirts on at the Capitol demonstration against governor’s initiatives”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports today that “2 topless protesters arrested at Capitol; Breasts Not Bombs opposes governor.”

And The Sacramento Bee reports that “Protest exposes 2 women to jail.”

“Justices to Rule on a Challenge to U.S. Tribunals”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

In The Washington Post, Charles Lane reports today that “High Court To Hear Case On War Powers; Use of Military Panels For Detainees Is Tested.”

In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has articles headlined “Terror Trials to Get Review; The Supreme Court will hear a challenge to Bush administration plans for military tribunals to try foreign detainees; Chief justice recuses himself” and “Court to Decide on the Rights of Foreign Convicts; A treaty requires U.S. to contact other nations if a citizen is arrested; New trials could result.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Supreme Court steps into dispute over detainee tribunals.”

In The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and David Rogers report that “High Court to Hear A Key Challenge To Tribunal Policy” (temporary free access).

In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “High court to hear Cuba detainee’s appeal; Case of suspected bin Laden bodyguard tests US war powers.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Supreme Court to hear Guantanamo detainee’s case.”

The Miami Herald reports that “Military court challenge to be heard; The Supreme Court decided to hear a challenge by Osama bin Laden’s driver of U.S. military tribunals.”

The Washington Times reports that “Court to rule on war tribunals.”

Financial Times reports that “Supreme Court to rule on Guantanamo trials.”

From Australia, The Daily Telegraph contains an article headlined “Boost for Hicks.”

And The Houston Chronicle reports that “Immigrant defendants’ access to consulates on docket; Cases similar to Texas dispute; terror suspects’ legal rights also to be weighed.”

“A Catholic Majority on the Supreme Court: The Good News in Judge Alito’s Nomination, and a Warning.” FindLaw commentator Michael C. Dorf has this essay today.