In today’s edition of The Concord (N.H.) Monitor: The newspaper contains articles headlined “High court sends back abortion case; Sides clash on extent of requested change“; “Lower court’s task: Figure out intent“; and “Where the case goes from here.”

In addition, the newspaper contains an editorial entitled “Settle abortion case in Legislature, not court.”

“Judge Alito — In His Own Words”: The Republican Policy Committee issued this document today.

“Attacks On Analysis Of Alito Record Are Pure Politics”: Paul Janensch has this essay today in The Hartford Courant.

“New life, identity await Fortier as he leaves prison; Key witness in Oklahoma bombing trials to go into protection program”: This article appears today in The Dallas Morning News.

And The New York Times reports today that “Release of Figure in ’95 Bombing Rekindles Fears.”

“Court Upholds Obscene Yogurt Conviction”: The Associated Press provides this report from South Korea.

The Korea Times reports that “Top Court Rules Against Commercial Nude Performance.”

And The Chosun Ilbo reports that “Nude Yogurt Promotion Stunt Was Obscene.”

The decision does not appear to be available in English from the web site of the Supreme Court of Korea.

“Salazar will give Alito thumbs down”: The Rocky Mountain News provides this update.

And The Denver Post provides a news update headlined “Salazar to vote against Alito.”

In commentary, The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette today contains an editorial entitled “The Alito vote: Americans will regret his confirmation.”

And in The Providence (R.I.) Journal, Glenn Sugameli has an op-ed entitled “Alito threatens health and clean water.”

“Feds after Google data”: Today in The San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz has an article that begins, “The Bush administration on Wednesday asked a federal judge to order Google to turn over a broad range of material from its closely guarded databases. The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court.” The newspaper has posted online the federal government’s motion to compel at this link.

Add this to the list of things Immigration Judges probably shouldn’t say during an on-the-record hearing: According to an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued today, Immigration Judge Donald Ferlise said on the record during an asylum hearing, “You have to understand, the whole world does not revolve around you and the other Indonesians that just want to live here because they enjoy the United States better than they enjoy living in Indonesia. It is not a world that revolves around you and your ethnic group.” In a footnote to the Third Circuit’s discussion of those remarks, the court notes, “This is not the first time we have been troubled by the conduct of the IJ who presided over the proceedings in this case.”

“Top Democrat Leahy to vote against Alito; Democrat Nelson to support Supreme Court nominee”: CNN.com provides this report.

Third Circuit Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issues a new opinion: Today’s ruling involves the highly controversial issue of the automatic stay in bankruptcy.

“Appeals court revives prosecution of road rage”: The Associated Press provides this report from Wisconsin. Yesterday’s ruling of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals can be accessed here. This blog’s more sensitive readers are cautioned that the opinion recounts acts of bird flipping.

“Sen. Leahy to Oppose Alito Nomination”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Post-Hearing Report on the Nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court: ‘The Wrong Nominee at the Wrong Time.'” The organization People For the American Way has issued this report today.

“RIM: BlackBerry is ‘vital’ to U.S.; Says patent fray doesn’t warrant shutdown.” This article appears today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.

And The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports today that “BlackBerry firm fights shutdown.”

“DeMoss on De Constitution”: At “PrawfsBlawg,” Paul Horwitz has this interesting post about the recent op-ed by a Fifth Circuit judge who’s read the U.S. Constitution and noticed that the word “privacy” simply isn’t mentioned.

“The Baucus Effect”: At “Red State,” Leon H has this post examining the prospect of an Alito filibuster.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting: In today’s newspaper, Jess Bravin reports that “High Court Returns Abortion Case, Balking on Major Change to Law” (pass-through link).

And the newspaper today also contains a front page article headlined “Legal Setback; A Career in Courts Leads to Trouble For Seymour Lazar; For 50 Years, He Consorted With Stars and Financiers; ‘Did I Hurt Anybody?’; An Ankle Bracelet at Age 78” (pass-through link). According to the article, “Mr. Lazar, long a legal thorn in the side of others, is facing the legal fight of his life. In an indictment unsealed in June, a federal grand jury in Los Angeles accused him of criminal acts related to more than 50 lawsuits, filed over more than 25 years, in which he or a family member served as lead plaintiff. They charged him with receiving ‘more than $2.4 million in secret and illegal kickback payments’ from a New York law firm. Mr. Lazar’s case is intertwined with a long-running federal investigation of that firm, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, one of the nation’s largest class-action law firms before it split in two in 2004.”

“A lifetime of firsts comes to an end”: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch today contains this obituary of Senior Eighth Circuit Judge Theodore McMillian. Links to additional reflections on the judge’s life and accomplishments can be accessed via this earlier post.

“Restraining Order: Against Alito.” This editorial (free access) will appear in the January 30, 2006 issue of The New Republic.

And that issue of the magazine will also contain an essay by Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen entitled “Uncle Sam: Will Alito let the president do whatever he wants?” (pass-through link).

“Hypocritic Oath: Scalia on abortion vs. Scalia on assisted suicide.” William Saletan has this human nature essay online at Slate.

The battle over activist judges, in Canada: The Toronto Globe and Mail today contains a front page article headlined “Harper warns of activist judges; Tory leader says some appointed to bench by Liberals promote social agendas.” The newspaper also contains an article headlined “Does politics dictate top court appointments?”

And The Toronto Star today reports that “Tory leader tempers his comments on judiciary; Cotler: Remarks are ‘disrespectful of the rule of law’; Minister says all members of bench are independent.”

“Honest Nominees And Artless Dodgers”: Stuart Taylor Jr. has this essay in the current issue of National Journal.

“Democrats Poised Against Alito; Most senators in the party seem set to oppose his confirmation to the Supreme Court, but few express enthusiasm for mounting a filibuster”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Boston Globe reports today that “Democrats doubt they can stop Alito; A liberal coalition calls for filibuster.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “Alito tests loyalties of newest senator; The Democrat’s vote on his fellow New Jersey native risks alienating his party or his state constituents.”

The Asbury Park (N.J.) Press reports that “Menendez prepares for a vote on Alito; He’ll meet with court nominee today.”

The St. Petersburg Times reports that “Chat with Alito has Nelson wary; ‘I didn’t hear from him what I wanted to hear,’ he says; GOP’s Martinez will vote to confirm.”

The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports that “‘Evasive’ Alito troubles Nelson; Senator meets with nominee.”

The Baxter (Ark.) Bulletin reports that “Pryor fears Alito’s conservative stance.”

And The Salem (Ore.) Statesman Journal reports that “Coalition urges ‘no’ vote on Alito; Group delivers a petition with 32,000 signatures to Gordon Smith’s office.”

In commentary, The Philadelphia Daily News contains an editorial entitled “Alito for the Supreme Court; While his views are troubling, he remains a qualified nominee.”

The Poughkeepsie Journal contains an editorial entitled “Alito earns confirmation.”

And in The Hartford Courant, Emanuel Margolis has an op-ed entitled “Biden And Co. Botched Easy Case Against Alito.”

“Justices Reaffirm Emergency Access to Abortion”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “In Abortion Ruling, High Court Finds Middle Path.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that “Justices send back abortion case; N.H. dispute returns to lower court.”

The New York Sun reports that “Court Hands Down a Poser On Abortion.”

Charlie Savage of The Boston Globe reports that “Justices refuse to reject N.H. abortion law; Order lower court to revisit ruling on parental notice.” And an editorial is entitled “A dodge on abortion.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “Justices say throwing out abortion law goes too far; Panel tells lower courts to fix flaw in state measure that restricts teens.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Supreme Court crafts compromise in abortion law appeal.”

The Washington Times reports that “High court faults rulings against N.H. abortion law.”

The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader contains articles headlined “NH abortion law sent back” and “Law’s backers, foes find something to like in ruling.” And an editorial is entitled “Ayotte’s partial victory: AG persuades court, with an exception.”

The Washington Post contains an editorial entitled “Life-and-Death Decisions.”

And The Baltimore Sun contains an editorial entitled “Abortion status quo.”

“Bill seeks abortion’s end in Ohio; Backers say it could help overturn Roe v. Wade”: The Cincinnati Enquirer contains this article today.

“U.S. justice reflects on his take on cases”: This article appears today in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“Justices Restore L.A. Man’s Conviction; The high court faults the 9th Circuit, saying its reversal exceeded the authority that federal judges have in decisions by state courts”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides this report today.

And today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “3rd strike sentence reinstated.”

“The Assisted-Suicide Decision”: This editorial appears today in The New York Times.

“What Substantive Lessons Should We Learn from the Alito Hearings?” FindLaw commentator Edward Lazarus has this essay today.

Available onlin from law.com: Tony Mauro has articles headlined “Would a Justice Alito Carry On the Reagan Revolution?” and “Supreme Court Sidesteps Abortion Rights Showdown; A rare unanimous abortion ruling that may be O’Connor’s valedictory writing.”

In other news, “5th Circuit ‘Miranda’ Case Muddies the Waters.”

And an article reports that “N.J. Supreme Court to Address Limits on Client Testimonials.”

“Moderate Democrat facing tough re-election on fence about Alito”: Thursday’s edition of The South Florida Sun-Sentinel will contain an article that begins, “After an ‘engaging and friendly’ conversation with Samuel Alito on Wednesday, Florida Sen. Bill Nelson said he remained troubled about the Supreme Court nominee’s refusal to stand up for ‘the little guy’ against big business and big government.”

Bloomberg News reports that “Democrats Predict Filibuster Won’t Be Used to Block Alito Vote.”

The St. Petersburg Times today contains an editorial entitled “Judging Alito: Confirming Judge Samuel Alito for the U.S. Supreme Court has its risks, but there is no compelling reason not to.”

And The Winston-Salem Journal contains an editorial entitled “Alito a Bad Choice.”

“U.S. justice reflects on how he tackles cases”: The Philadelphia Inquirer provides a news update that begins, “He came to Philadelphia not to discuss today’s New Hampshire abortion-notification decision, or the Oregon assisted-suicide case, and most certainly not the confirmation of his prospective colleague, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. No, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer came here tonight to talk about his judicial philosophy and to push his new book. There were copies for sale at a table right outside the hall.”

“Two more Oregon cases pending before Supreme Court; Upcoming decisions will involve arrest procedures, death-penalty sentencing”: This article appears today in The Salem (Ore.) Statesman Journal.

“Justices Send Back Parent-Notification Law; Lower Court Must Modify N.H. Abortion Measure Instead of Striking It Down”: Charles Lane will have this article Thursday in The Washington Post.

And Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court Steers Clear of First Abortion Case in 5 Years.”

“High Court Upholds Oregon Law Backing Doctor-Assisted Suicide”: Jess Bravin has this article (pass-through link) today in The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper also contains a related editorial entitled “Federalism, a la Carte” (pass-through link).

Today in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Right-to-Die Law; Justices say Ashcroft exceeded his power by trying to punish doctors who dispensed lethal drugs; Chief Justice Roberts joins dissenters.” The newspaper also contains articles headlined “‘We Won,’ Says Cancer Patient in Oregon Case; One of four plaintiffs hails the high court’s decision as a moral victory for the dying and legal vindication for the state’s voters” and “Is California Next in Line? In Sacramento, backers of an assisted-suicide law say they’ve gained a lot of momentum from the court ruling; But they still face major obstacles.” And an editorial is entitled “States of hypocrisy.”

In The New York Times, Timothy Egan and Adam Liptak have a news analysis headlined “Fraught Issue, but Narrow Ruling in Oregon Suicide Case.”

In USA Today, Joan Biskupic has articles headlined “Suicide ruling reopens debate; Ore. law upheld by high court” and “Opinion accuses feds of power grab; Tone, wording a rebuke of administration.” And a related article is headlined “Some hope for more laws; others fear them; Both sides react strongly to ruling on aided suicide.”

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko has an article headlined “Victory for assisted-suicide law; High court rules for Oregon over White House.” And in related coverage, “California lawmakers renew effort; Backers hope ruling will boost support for assisted death.”

In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “Doctor-assisted suicide gains ground; Supreme Court rejects bid to block Ore. law.” And an editorial is entitled “Oregon’s assistants.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough reports that “Supreme Court upholds Oregon suicide statute; The terminally ill can get drugs from doctors to end lives.”

The Oregonian contains articles headlined “Justices back Oregon suicide law“; “Plaintiffs and supporters celebrate the Supreme Court’s ruling on assisted suicide“; “Plaintiff says she wants to keep her options open if her condition deteriorates“; and “Given ruling, Smith says he won’t fight assisted suicide.” And an editorial is entitled “Oregon wins — without Roberts; Oregon may have won the battle over assisted suicide, but Chief Justice John Roberts’ dissenting vote suggests a larger war.”

The Salem (Ore.) Statesman Journal contains articles headlined “Justices uphold assisted suicide; For some, decision is the end of a long battle; for others, it’s the beginning” and “Opponents hope Congress will step in; However, lawmakers say assisted suicide isn’t a high priority.” And an editorial is entitled “Congress should heed ruling that upholds assisted suicide; It should follow Sen. Smith’s advice and accept the high court’s decision.”

The New York Sun reports that “Leaders of GOP Flinching On Issue of Assisted Suicide.”

The Sacramento Bee reports that “Assisted suicide law stands; High court rules 6-3 that the federal government went too far to block state’s rule.”

The Washington Times reports that “High court upholds suicide law.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an article headlined “Suicide ruling: End or a start?”

The Seattle Times reports that “Assisted-suicide decision may bring new effort here.”

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that “Ruling could revive assisted suicide effort here.”

The Chicago Tribune reports that “More vital issue is care of the dying, doctors say.” And an editorial is entitled “Suicide and states’ rights.”

And The Toronto Globe and Mail reports that “Oregon’s assisted-suicide law upheld; U.S. top court rejects federal bid to punish MDs who prescribe life-ending drugs.”