In Wednesday’s edition of The Washington Post: Charles Lane will have articles headlined “Abortion Case to Test New Justices; Court Will Review ‘Partial Birth’ Ban” and “Court Hears Water Act Arguments; Control of Wetlands at Issue in Michigan Case.”

And in other news, “Ruling Protects Sect’s Use of Hallucinogenic Tea.”

In Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times: Linda Greenhouse will have articles headlined “Justices to Review Federal Ban on Disputed Abortion Method” and “Sect Allowed to Import Its Hallucinogenic Tea.”

An article will report that “Justices Debate Federal Role in Regulating Water Pollution.”

In other news, “South Dakota Lawmakers Set to Vote on a Bill Banning Nearly All Abortions.”

And in news from California, “Questions Over Method Lead to Delay of Execution.”

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro reports that “Alito’s First Day on High Court Packed With Key Issues.”

Shannon P. Duffy reports that “Lottery Winners Lose Tax Appeal Before 3rd Circuit.”

An article reports that “Perfect 10 Racks Up Preliminary Injunction Against Google.” The ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California can be accessed here.

And Justin Scheck reports that “Lerach, Weiss May Not Face Indictments.”

“Calif. Execution Postponed Indefinitely”: David Kravets of The Associated Press provides an updated report that begins, “The state on Tuesday postponed indefinitely the execution of a condemned killer amid a court battle over the state’s method of lethal injection and the role doctors may play in the death chamber.”

“U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia on Outsourcing American Law”: Via C-SPAN, you can view by clicking here (RealPlayer required) the program at which, according to The Associated Press, Justice Antonin Scalia was heckled today. The heckler was escorted from the room shortly after the 43-minute mark of C-SPAN’s telecast, so at least he got to hear Tom Goldstein’s question for Justice Scalia.

Update: Ted Frank was there and has this post at “PointofLaw.com.”

“Supreme Court to hear Nebraska late-term abortion case”: The Lincoln Journal Star provides this news update.

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR‘s “All Things Considered“: Nina Totenberg delivered reports entitled “High Court Takes Up Partial-Birth Abortion Case” and “High Court Hears Challenge to Clean Water Act.”

And this evening’s broadcast also contained segments entitled “Wetlands Show Effect of Court’s Last Decision“; “Memo Criticizes Policy Toward Guantanamo Detainees“; and “Execution Will Occur Tonight, California Says.”

RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

“Law Reviews Adapt to New Era”: Brandt Goldstein has this article (pass-through link) online today at The Wall Street Journal’s web site (via “The Volokh Conspiracy“). This spring at Harvard Law School, there’s scheduled to be an impressive symposium on the subject titled “Bloggership: How Blogs Are Transforming Legal Scholarship.”

“Dirty Water: The Supreme Court takes a long, tall drink from the Clean Water Act.” Online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch. Therein, she writes, “Justice Samuel Alito, who asks one question three minutes into oral argument then remains silent for the rest of the case, can’t seem to sit still; twitching, shifting, gulping his water, and trying out the various rocking settings on his chair. It’s like he thinks we are all staring at him, which we are.”

“Supreme Court Reopens Abortion Issue on Alito’s First Day”: Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times provides this news update. Echoing a point that I noted in a post earlier today, Greenhouse reports that “The court had the administration’s appeal under review since early January. It may have deferred action as a courtesy to Justice Alito, who participated in his first closed-door conference with the other justices last Friday.”

And Stephen Henderson of Knight Ridder Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court to look at federal ban on late-term abortion.”

“Hecklers Disrupt Scalia at D.C. Appearance”: The Associated Press provides this report. More details on the event can be accessed here.

Warren Richey is reporting: In tomorrow’s edition of The Christian Science Monitor, in addition to the article I earlier noted here, he will also have articles headlined “If judges screen evidence, is the jury usurped? The high court Wednesday considers a judge’s role in deciding what evidence the accused can present” and “High court upholds rights of minority sects vs. US drug laws.”

“Moussaoui Team Seeks Rep. Weldon Testimony”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Defense lawyers for confessed al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui said Tuesday they oppose efforts of a Pennsylvania congressman to avoid testifying at Moussaoui’s death-penalty trial.”

The motion to quash and supporting brief of U.S. Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA) are available online at the foregoing links.

And in another noteworthy development, last Friday a group of press organizations sought to intervene in the Moussaoui case to gain access to parts of the trial record that the federal district court had announced would remain closed. The news organizations’ brief can be accessed here.

“Anti-Abortion Group Backs Fired Pregnant Teacher; Group Says Catholic School Is Encouraging Abortion by Firing Woman”: ABC News provides this written report.

New York State’s definition of “Hispanic” does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause even though the definition excludes people of Spanish or Portuguese descent who do not also come from Latin America: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this ruling today. The State uses the definition to certify minority-owned businesses for possible affirmative action.

“Alito’s First Day on High Court a Busy One”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.

“State’s prayer feud takes national stage; Bill would bar judges from having a say in how lawmakers pray”: The Indianapolis Star today contains an article that begins, “U.S. Rep. Mike Sodrel, R-Ind., wants to take away federal judges’ power to rule on the content of prayer in state legislatures.”

And that newspaper also provides a news update headlined “Sodrel steps into Statehouse prayer dispute.”

“U.S. Expected to End Inquiry of 2 Class-Action Lawyers”: The New York Times provides a news update that begins, “After five years, a wide-ranging federal investigation of the famed class-action lawyer William S. Lerach and his former partner, Melvyn I. Weiss, is expected to end in a few weeks with no charges being brought against either of them for now, according to people close to the investigation.”

“Alito Hears His First Supreme Court Cases”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s first day on the bench ended a bit abruptly: He cut off Ruth Bader Ginsburg in his rush to leave the courtroom.”

And The AP also provides an article headlined “High Court Weighs Clean Water Act Limits.”

“New abortion case for court; Supreme Court decides to reexamine the so-called partial-birth procedure, which Congress severely limited in 2003”: Warren Richey will have this article in Wednesday’s issue of The Christian Science Monitor.

And Bloomberg News reports that “‘Partial Birth’ Abortion Ban Gets High Court Review.”

On today’s broadcast of NPR‘s “Day to Day“: The broadcast contained segments entitled “High Court Agrees to Hear Abortion Case” (featuring Dahlia Lithwick) and “The Medical Ethics of the Death Penalty.” RealPlayer is required to launch these audio segments.

What should a federal district court do if a criminal defendant runs out of money to pay his retained defense counsel on the eve of trial? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit today issued a lengthy opinion addressing that question.

“Oregon Property Rights Law Upheld”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Oregon Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a voter-approved property rights law that requires governments to either pay landowners for losses caused by state land-use regulations or waive the regulation and allow development.”

The Oregonian provides a news update headlined “Supreme Court says yes to Measure 37.”

And The Salem Statesman Journal provides a news update headlined “Reaction to Measure 37 ruling mixed.”

You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Oregon at this link.

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini has reports headlined “Reshaped U.S. high court takes abortion case” and “Top court won’t review college newspaper censorship.”

And in other news, “Top court rejects challenge to anti-smoking ads.”

“Supreme Court to Determine Licensee’s Right to Sue for Declaratory Judgment of Invalidity or NonInfringement”: “Patently-O: Patent Law Blog” provides this post.

And The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court to Hear MedImmune Case.”

The dormant Commerce Clause is violated by New Jersey’s limitations on where large trucks passing through the State may travel, Third Circuit rules: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link.

“The issue before us is whether plaintiffs’ status as aliens who are not legally authorized to work in the United States precludes their recovery of lost earnings.” Today the Court of Appeals of New York, that State’s highest court, ruled that illegal aliens can recover lost wages. You can access the opinion at this link.

“Justices tackle late-term abortion issue”: CNN.com provides this report.

And David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides a news update headlined “High Court to Address ‘Partial-Birth’ Abortions.”

Reuters is reporting: James Vicini reports that “US court to decide federal ban on some abortions.”

And in other news, “US top court allows religious hallucinogenic tea” and “High court will review MedImmune suit dismissal.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Gina Holland reports that “Court Allows Church’s Hallucinogenic Tea“; “Court Renews Racial Discrimination Case“; “Court Won’t Hear Campus Newspaper Appeal“; and “Justices Reject Pa. Death Penalty Appeal.”

And in other news, “Court Rejects Tobacco Cos. Appeal on Ads“; “Iranian Terror Case Sent to Lower Court“; and “Court Steps in Colo. Redistricting Dispute.”

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Order List and opinions in argued cases: The Court today issued opinions in two argued cases.

1. In Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal, No. 04-1084, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion on behalf of a unanimous Court affirming the Tenth Circuit‘s ruling that the federal government failed to demonstrate, at the preliminary injunction stage, a compelling interest in barring respondent’s sacramental use of the hallucinogenic tea known as hoasca. You can access the syllabus here; Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

2. In Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, No. 04-1264, Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, and Justice Clarence Thomas dissented. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida was reversed, and the case remanded, by a vote of 7-1. You can access the syllabus here; Justice Scalia’s opinion of the Court here; Justice Thomas’s dissenting opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

Today’s Order List can be accessed here. The Court today granted review in a total of four cases.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to hear ‘partial-birth’ abortion case.”

In addition to issuing opinions in argued cases today, the Court also issued three per curiam opinions, which can be accessed here; here; and here (along with a concurring opinion and a dissenting opinion). It appears that Justice Alito took part in these per curiam rulings, although of course he did not participate in the decisions announced today in the two argued cases, because he was not on the Court when those cases were argued.

BREAKING NEWS — “Justices to Weigh Late-Term Abortion Ban”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will consider the constitutionality of banning a type of late-term abortion, teeing up a contentious issue for a newly-constituted court already in a state of flux over privacy rights.” The law at issue is the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

The ruling under review, which declared the federal law unconstitutional, originates from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Late last month, both the Second Circuit (here) and the Ninth Circuit (here) joined the Eighth Circuit in declaring the law unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme Court‘s most recent decision examining whether the so-called “partial birth” abortion procedure may be banned issued in 2000. There, the Court ruled by a 5-4 margin, with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor providing the decisive fifth vote, that the ban was unconstitutional.

It is doubtful that Justice Samuel A. Alito. Jr.’s vote was required in order to grant certiorari in this case, so some may express skepticism over why the Court waited until today to grant review, when review presumably could have been granted before the U.S. Senate had confirmed Justice Alito to the Court. In other words, could the Court have attempted to influence the politics of the confirmation battle by postponing the grant of review in this case until today? The answer to that question may never be definitively known.

The federal government’s petition for writ of certiorari, reply brief in support thereof, and supplemental brief can all be accessed online.

On the agenda: At 10 a.m. today, the Supreme Court of the United States will issue an Order List and may issue one or more opinions in argued cases. Stay tuned for complete coverage.

The Order List could include a grant of review in a case that would allow the Court to determine the constitutionality of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

“Berkeley official sent misleading e-mails; Admissions director admits mistake”: Today’s edition of The Yale Daily News contains an article that begins, “Edward Tom, director of admissions at the University of California, Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law, confirmed Monday that he accidentally sent a large percentage of the school’s applicants nationwide an e-mail on Friday congratulating them on their admission to the school, along with at least one of two apology e-mails asking students to disregard the initial message and stating that it did not imply admission.”

In news from Kansas: The Topeka Capital-Journal reports today that “Committee rejects plan to approve high court judges.”

And The Wichita Eagle reports today that “Proposal limits court’s options on school funds.”