“Miss. defeats life at conception ballot initiative”: The Associated Press has this report.

“Court Casts a Wary Eye on Tracking by GPS”: Adam Liptak will have this article Wednesday in The New York Times.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court worries that new technology creates ‘1984’ scenarios.”

In Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin will have an article headlined “Use of GPS to Monitor Suspects Debated at High Court.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor has an article headlined “At the Supreme Court: Is GPS tracking of suspects too Orwellian? Supreme Court on Tuesday considered whether police must get a warrant before attaching a GPS tracking device to a suspect’s car; The justices’ posed questions that echo the Orwell novel ‘1984.’”

Mike Sacks of The Huffington Post has an article headlined “GPS Tracking: Supreme Court Debates Privacy Limits On Police.”

On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “Justices Invoke ‘1984’ During GPS Case Arguments.”

This evening’s broadcast of “The PBS NewsHour” contained a segment entitled “Supreme Court Hears Landmark GPS Tracking Case.”

Online at The Atlantic, law professor Garrett Epps has an essay entitled “Justice Roberts: Could the Government Track My Car?”

And online at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has a Supreme Court dispatch entitled “Which Way Privacy? The Supreme Court asks whether the government can put a GPS device on your car without a warrant.”

“Justices Rebuke a New Orleans Prosecutor”: Adam Liptak will have this article Wednesday in The New York Times.

“U.S. Supreme Court rejects Phila. murderer’s appeal”: Nathan Gorenstein of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this news update.

“U.S. prosecutors oppose paying Clemens mistrial fees”: James Vicini of Reuters has this report.

Update: And at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella has a post titled “Prosecutors: Clemens’ Defense Team Not Entitled To Legal Fees.”

“In a surprise, D.C. appeals court upholds healthcare law”: The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

The Washington Times has a news update headlined “Appeals court upholds Obama’s health care law.”

And Ariane de Vogue of ABC News has a blog post titled “Big Victory for Obama Administration on Health Care Today.”

“Supreme Court expresses doubts about police GPS use”: Joan Biskupic of USA Today has this news update.

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Police Use of Global-Positioning Devices Questioned by U.S. Supreme Court.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court seems troubled by police GPS tracking.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Justices to decide police use of GPS devices on suspects’ cars.”

At Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Supreme Court Sees Shades of 1984 in Unchecked GPS Tracking.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument recap: For GPS, get a warrant.”

“Court seems ready to overturn La. conviction”: Jesse J. Holland of The Associated Press has this report.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Smith v. Cain, No. 10-8145.

“Obama’s Health-Care Law Requiring Insurance Upheld by Appeals Court Panel”: Bloomberg News has this report.

And Reuters reports that “U.S. appeals court backs Obama healthcare law.”

My earlier coverage of today’s D.C. Circuit ruling appears at this link.

By a vote of 99-to-0, the U.S. Senate has confirmed the nomination of Evan J. Wallach to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: You can access the official roll call vote tally at this link.

“Supreme Court questions warrantless GPS tracking”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this updated report.

Update: At “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “Reflections on the Oral Argument in United States v. Jones, the GPS Fourth Amendment Case.”

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in United States v. Jones, No. 10-1259.

“Appeals court upholds Obama health care law”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A conservative-leaning panel of federal appellate judges is upholding President Barack Obama’s health care law as constitutional, helping set up a Supreme Court fight.”

You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.

Senior Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman issued the majority opinion, in which Senior Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards joined. The majority opinion concludes:

That a direct requirement for most Americans to purchase any product or service seems an intrusive exercise of legislative power surely explains why Congress has not used this authority before–but that seems to us a political judgment rather than a recognition of constitutional limitations. It certainly is an encroachment on individual liberty, but it is no more so than a command that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race, that gravely ill individuals cannot use a substance their doctors described as the only effective palliative for excruciating pain, or that a farmer cannot grow enough wheat to support his own family. The right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute, and yields to the imperative that Congress be free to forge national solutions to national problems, no matter how local–or seemingly passive–their individual origins.

Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh dissented, explaining that “my analysis leads me decisively to the conclusion that we lack jurisdiction because of the Anti-Injunction Act.”

Access online today’s opinion of the U,S, Supreme Court in an argued case: Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Greene v. Fisher, No. 10-637. You can access the oral argument in the case via this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court upholds conviction in Pa. murder case.”

“Three Trials for Murder: In the name of justice, did the military sidestep double jeopardy?” In the November 14, 2011 issue of The New Yorker, Nicholas Schmidle has this very interesting article (subscription required for full access).

“Revival of Lawsuit Over Expulsion Sparks Harsh Dissent”: Mark Walsh had this post yesterday at the “School Law” blog of Education Week.

My earlier coverage of the dissent from last week’s Fifth Circuit denial of rehearing en banc can be accessed here.

“Supreme Court to weigh juveniles’ life sentences without parole; In two cases involving 14-year-olds convicted in homicides, the justices could further bolster the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

And at the “School Law” blog of Education Week, Mark Walsh has a post titled “High Court to Weigh Life Sentences for Juvenile Murderers.”

“Summum refiles lawsuit against Pleasant Grove”: Yesterday’s edition of The Daily Herald of Provo, Utah contained this article.

And The Associated Press reports that “Utah religious group sues to display monument.”

“Florida antiabortion group wants its own ‘personhood’ amendment, faces long odds”: This article appears today in The St. Petersburg Times.

“Supreme Court confronts a trove of constitutional questions in case involving passport law”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

“Same-sex parents birth certificate case argued; Judge to rule later on rights later”: This article appears today in The Des Moines Register.

“Supreme Court looks at warrantless GPS tracking”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.

On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg has an audio segment entitled “Do Police Need Warrants For GPS Tracking Devices?”

And at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, Kim Zetter has a post titled “Busted! Two New Fed GPS Trackers Found on SUV.”

“U.S. Supreme Court restores death penalty in local slaying; Panel’s ruling in ‘buried alive’ case overturned”: Jim Provance has this article today in The Toledo Blade.