Access online Third Circuit Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr.‘s responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee‘s questionnaire: National Review Online has posted the document at this link.

“Records Pertaining to Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. — Record Group 60: Department of Justice.” The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration has just posted online two sets of new documents, “Files of the Attorney General, Edwin Meese III” and “Files of Charles Cooper.”

Update at 11:20 a.m.: Likely to garner much attention is a document described as “Memorandum concerning Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, No. 84-495 and Diamond v. Charles, No. 84-1379 from Samuel A. Alito to the Solicitor General, (May 30, 1985).” What appears to be the final draft of that memo is available here.

“Harvard Law On A Heterodox Spree, Listing To Right; In Age of John Roberts, New Kind of Legal Expert Sought by Elena Kagan”: Anna Schneider-Mayerson has this article in the December 5, 2005 issue of The New York Observer.

“Justices weigh retardation safeguard in death penalty cases”: The Newark Star-Ledger contains this article today.

“The not-so-dirty bomber”: This editorial appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.

Available today from National Review Online: Clarke D. Forsythe has an essay entitled “Supreme Opportunity: Will the Court fix its abortion mess?”

And Kathryn Jean Lopez has an essay entitled “Meet Jane: Portrait of a teenager protected by New Hampshire’s parental-notification law.”

“Rocking the Bus: A Colorado woman takes a stand against arbitrary ID checks.” Jacob Sullum has this essay online today at Reason. In the essay, Sullum writes, “A civil case raising similar issues in the context of airport ID checks is scheduled to be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit the day before Davis’ arraignment.”

“House budget sleeper splits the 9th Circuit”: The San Francisco Chronicle today contains an article that begins, “A little-noticed provision in the massive House budget bill would fulfill the longtime goal of conservatives to split the San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, creating a new 12th circuit appellate court and allowing President Bush to name a slate of new federal judges.”

“How the Building Crumbles: Could bird poo have made a chunk of marble fall off the Supreme Court Building?” Daniel Engber has this explainer essay online at Slate.

“Justices Step Into Abortion Rights Case”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

And James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Top court reviews abortion notice law.”

In today’s edition of The Concord (N.H.) Monitor: An article reports that “Abortion case hits high court; New Hampshire law could tighten access.”

From The Associated Press, “Supreme Court a familiar stop for N.H. cases; Current case not state’s first time in spotlight.”

And an op-ed is entitled “Counting votes and giving Ayotte the benefit of the doubt.”

“High Court to Weigh Parental Notification for Abortion”: Nina Totenberg had this report (RealPlayer required) on today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Morning Edition.”

“Justices Take Up Rule Against ‘Tying’ Products; The high court leans toward making it harder for competitors to sue over the sales practice”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Alito Showed Even Keel in Court Dispute”: The Associated Press provides this report, which focuses on proposed Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1.

The Washington Times reports today that “Alito foes focus on drug case as omen on privacy.”

And The Badger Herald reports that “Law panel deliberates on Alito’s nomination.”

In commentary, Newsday contains an op-ed by Rosario A. Iaconis has an op-ed entitled “Alito can be proud of his heritage; Critics of the court nominee are resorting to anti-Italian smears, but he has a majestic patrimony behind him.”

In The Oregonian, Nick Fish has an op-ed entitled “The Alito nomination: On the wrong side of history for women.”

And in The Philadelphia Daily News, Rotan E. Lee has an op-ed entitled “A Brave New Court, Part I.”

“Justices to weigh parental notice for abortions”: This article appears today in The Baltimore Sun.

The New York Sun reports today that “Health Exception Seen as Central To High Court Case.”

Gallup News Service reports that “Americans Favor Parental Involvement in Teen Abortion Decisions; Think laws should require parental consent.”

The Boston Globe reports that “Abortion case puts spotlight today on Roberts’s queries; The scope may color Alito’s possible impact.”

The Manchester Union Leader reports that “In 12 years since law school, Ayotte’s career has taken off.”

The Burlington Free Press reports that “N.H. abortion case has Vermont roots.”

The Lawrence (Kan.) Journal-World reports that “Status quo at stake; New generation may face abortion questions.”

And The Winston-Salem Journal reports that “N.C. one of first states to allow abortion; Procedure legalized in 1967; if Roe was overturned, push for changing law probable.”

In commentary, The New York Times contains an editorial entitled “The Next Abortion Decision.” And those with TimesSelect can access an item entitled “Talking Points: The Waning Power of Roe v. Wade.”

The Washington Times contains an editorial entitled “Abortion and the Roberts court.”

In The Denver Post, columnist Al Knight has an op-ed entitled “Cases could define new direction of high court.”

And in The Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass has an op-ed entitled “Parents are the only judges who matter.”

“Former clerk discusses Supreme Court procedures”: The Daily Princetonian contains this article today.

“Sidestepping Courts in the War on Terrorism; U.S. seeks leverage by moving detainees or changing their status before scheduled hearings; Critics call it legal dodge ball”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“One Person, One Filibuster? Judge Alito’s Controversial Comment on a Supreme Court Voting Rights Case.” Law Professor Richard L. Hasen, author of the “Election Law” blog, has this essay today at FindLaw.

“An Eminent Domain High Tide: Riviera Beach, Fla., wants to displace about 6,000 of its residents and raze their homes to build a yachting and residential complex.” The Los Angeles Times today contains an article that reports, “In what has been called the largest eminent-domain case in the nation, the mayor and other elected leaders want to move about 6,000 residents, tear down their homes and use the emptied 400-acre site to build a waterfront yachting and residential complex for the well-to-do”

“Abortion-notification case could test changing court”: Joan Biskupic will have this article Wednesday in USA Today, along with an article headlined “High court case may signal shift on abortion.” Meanwhile, on Thursday evening, you can see and hear Biskupic speak at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.

In Wednesday’s edition of Financial Times, Patti Waldmeir reports that “The US Supreme Court will today hear its first major abortion case in five years – the first big test of how the new chief justice, John Roberts, will rule on this controversial issue.”

And FOXNews.com reports that “Precedent at Stake in Supreme Court Abortion Case.”

“Pa. Justices Sued for Alleged Violation of Due Process; Attorney aims at use of dismissal to enforce appellate issue limits”: law.com tonight has made Shannon P. Duffy’s article, which I mentioned here earlier today, freely available at this link.

“Supreme Court to hear 2 abortion cases”: Allen Pusey will have this article tomorrow in The Dallas Morning News.

“The Supreme Court Tackles Abortion: A Look at Mandatory Parental Involvement Laws.” That was the title of last week’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Justice Talking,” which you can listen to online here (Windows Media) and here (mp3).

Sealed Appellee 1 defeats Sealed Appellant 1: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit today issued its ruling in Sealed Appellant 1 v. Sealed Appellee 1. The second 1 won. All celebration of victory and bemoaning of loss will occur under seal.

“Splitting the 9th Circuit”: This editorial appears today in The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

Yesterday, The Register-Guard of Eugene, Oregon contained an editorial entitled “A court divided.”

And The Honolulu Star-Bulletin recently published an editorial entitled “Splitting 9th Circuit would hurt Hawaii.”

“25th Annual Federalist Society Student Symposium, Columbia Law School–February 24 & 25, 2006”: Details here.

“Eskridge, Polsby Debate Solomon Amendment Case”: You can access the debate via this link, at “ACSBlog.”

“Pregnant woman’s manslaughter conviction reversed”: The Honolulu Advertiser provides a news update that begins, “The Hawai’i Supreme Court this morning reversed the manslaughter conviction for a 32-year-old woman whose use of crystal methamphetamine during her final days of pregnancy in 2001 led to the death of her two-day-old son. In a 38-page opinion, the court ruled that state law does not permit the prosecution of a mother’s prenatal conduct that causes the death of her baby. The prosecution was the first of its kind in Hawai’i and lawyers believed the court would be the only one in the country to uphold that type of conviction.”

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Hawaii can be accessed online (opinion of the court; concurring opinion; and additional concurring opinion).

“Third time the charm? Scheidler case goes back to high court Nov. 30.” This article appears in the current issue of The Catholic New World.

And The Fort Worth Star-Telegram recently published a related editorial entitled “It keeps going and going.”

“Solomon’s Choice — Or Hobson’s?” Paul Horwitz has this post at “PrawfsBlawg.”

And that blog’s founder, Dan Markel, today has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Innocents Lost: Who needs David Gale when you have Ruben Cantu?” online at Slate.

“A one-stop shop for the ‘best’ blogs; By gathering an elite group of widely read bloggers, a young media company hopes to make them more attractive to advertisers”: This article will appear Wednesday in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Injured fan’s Phillies suit tossed out”: The Harrisburg Patriot-News today contains an article that begins, “More than two years after catching a thrown baseball with his face, Jeremy Loughran struck out in his quest for damages from the Philadelphia Phillies. The state Superior Court in Harrisburg, in a 2-1 decision last week, upheld last year’s Philadelphia County Court ruling that Loughran, of Holland, Bucks County, assumed the risk of getting injured when he attended a July 5, 2003, game between the Phillies and the Atlanta Braves at Veterans Stadium.”

You can access last week’s ruling of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at this link.

“Women drop sexual harassment suit against gorilla’s caretaker”: CourtTV.com provides a report that begins, “Two women who claimed they were pressured to show their breasts to Koko, the famous gorilla who communicates with humans through sign language, have dropped their sexual harassment lawsuit after reaching a settlement agreement earlier this week.” And Justin Scheck of CalLaw.com reports that “Gorilla Lawsuit Nippled in the Bud.”

“Litigation Group Argues 50th Supreme Court Case”: The organization Public Citizen has issued a press release that begins, “Public Citizen Litigation Group argued its 50th case in front of the Supreme Court on Monday, November 28, in Will v. Hallock, an important case involving citizen access to the courts.”

“National Archives to Release Online Materials Relating to Samuel Alito”: More documents tomorrow, according to this press release issued today.