But the American Civil Liberties Union, along with groups and attorneys based in Michigan, filed a lawsuit in Detroit in January 2006 saying that the government's surveillance program was unconstitutional and interfered with their jobs.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs last August. The U.S. Justice Department then appealed the case to the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court.

Kary Moss, head of the Michigan branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said "it's a really unfortunate decision."

She said that one of the reasons the plaintiffs had difficulty proving they were being adversely affected was that the government has kept information about the wiretapping program a secret. Moss said they are considering appealing the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Dawud Walid, head of the Michigan branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations, one of the co-plaintiffs, said: "It's a shame that the court overturned the decision... what the executive branch was doing was unconstitutional."

Three men have admitted using the internet to urge Muslims to wage holy war on non-believers, police said, in what is believed to the first prosecution of its kind in Britain.

Tariq Al-Daour, Younes Tsouli and Waseem Mughal had close links with Al-Qaeda in Iraq and thought there was a 'global conspiracy' to wipe out Islam, London's Woolwich Crown Court was told.

UAE-born Al-Daour, 21, admitted a charge of 'inciting another person to commit an act of terrorism wholly or partly outside the UK which would, if committed in England and Wales, constitute murder'.

Moroccan-born Tsouli, 23, and British-born Mughal, 24, admitted the same charge on Monday.

The guilty pleas came two months into their trial.

Al-Daour and Tsouli, who lived in west London, and Mughal, from Kent, in southeast England, also pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud banks, credit card and charge card companies.

The trial was told the computer experts spent at least 12 months trying to encourage people to follow the extreme ideology of Osama bin Laden using email and radical websites.

Films of hostages and beheadings were found among their possessions, including footage of British contractor Ken Bigley, who was killed in Iraq in 2004; and US journalist Daniel Pearl, killed in Pakistan in 2002.

CDs containing instructions for making explosives and poisons were also found, with other documents giving advice on how to use a rocket-propelled grenade and how to make booby traps and a suicide vest.

Police also discovered online conversations in which Al-Dour talked of sponsoring terrorist attacks, becoming 'the new Osama' and justifying suicide bombings.

Chicago police are investigating whether three elderly patients, including two dead and the other in a coma, at the University of Chicago Medical Center were intentionally given insulin overdoses, according to media reports Wednesday.

Suspicions were raised after extremely high levels of insulin was found in a comatose hospital patient less than three weeks after a similar case.

"Right now we have not been able to determine criminal intent," said Chicago Police Department spokeswoman Monique Bond. "It's very early in the investigation."

On the other hand, the hospital spokesman John Easton said, "We haven't necessarily tied it to anyone. We don't know if it's medical error or product integrity or defective test results." "We just don't know yet."

All three patients were elderly women being treated in the same wing of the Hyde Park hospital, all were stricken between May 7 and June 5, and none had been prescribed insulin or was suffering from diabetes, Easton said.

According to experts, insulin is produced by the pancreas and controls blood sugar levels, which can cause serious complications including coma and death if they're too high or too low.

Insulin also is given as a medicine to treat diabetes and some other conditions that affect blood sugar control. A normal insulin level ranges from fewer than 10 to 50 micro international units per micro-liter.

The test found that two of the victims had insulin levels "thousands of times higher than normal levels," -- over 2,600. The third was not tested for insulin levels but was hypoglycemic at the time of her death, officials said.

Easton said the hospital has strengthened the security of its insulin storage procedures and increased oversight of how insulin is administered to patients, but that no staffs have been reassigned.

Doctors were alerted to the problem on June 6 when they first saw a high-insulin test result, Easton said. Test results for a second victim were seen on June 14. The hospital notified police after a June 22 staff "root cause" meeting at which internal investigators could not explain the deaths, Easton said.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been notified, Easton said, in case there were problems with the insulin itself.

The commutation, which drastically reduced Libby's punishment, is just short of a presidential pardon, which would have exonerated Libby and wiped the conviction from his record.

The key adviser to Cheney and an architect of the Iraq war, Libby was convicted March 6 in federal court. A jury found him guilty of lying to prosecutors who were trying to determine if top Bush administration officials leaked the identity of former CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson -- purported retaliation for her husband's contention that the Bush administration twisted intelligence facts to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

"I respect the jury's verdict," Bush said in a statement announcing his decision. "But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive."

While the president has the right to pardon convicted criminals and commute prison sentences, such actions are rare, and normally are taken after a thorough investigation by the Department of Justice. Bush, however, said in his statement that he made the decision personally.

The president noted that Libby's supporters believe the punishment does not fit the crime, while his critics point to the fact that he was convicted of perjury and obstructing justice in an open court. While both sides "have made important points, I have made my own evaluation," Bush said.

Democratic Party leaders, including several of the party's presidential candidates, were outraged, saying the commutation shows disrespect for the judicial system and smacks of a different legal standard for Bush's top aides.

In a statement issued last night, Senate majority leader Harry Reid called Bush's decision "disgraceful," adding that Libby's jury trial and conviction "was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone."

But House Republican whip Roy Blunt applauded the decision, saying, "President Bush did the right thing today in commuting the prison term for Scooter Libby. The prison sentence was overly harsh and the punishment did not fit the crime. The sentence was based on charges that had nothing to do with the leak of the identity of a CIA operative."

Libby's lawyer, William Jeffress , said he was pleased by the president's decision. "The prison sentence was imminent, but obviously the conviction itself is a heavy blow to Scooter," he told the Associated Press.

The case against Libby, authorities say, stemmed from a White House decision to play hardball with critics who challenged their reasoning for the war. Cheney was particularly incensed at a New York Times opinion article by Joseph Wilson, Plame Wilson's husband, a retired ambassador who accused the administration of exaggerating the security threat in Iraq.

As the White House was preparing its case for war, the CIA asked Wilson, a retired ambassador who had served in Africa, in 2002 to check out reports that Niger had sent materials for a nuclear weapon to Iraq. Upon returning, Wilson told the CIA he found no evidence of such a transfer.

Nonetheless, Bush said in his 2003 State of the Union speech that the British government "has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

In July 2003, Wilson wrote an op-ed piece for The New York Times stating that the intelligence the president cited in his speech had been "twisted" to exaggerate the Iraqi threat and convince Congress and the nation that war was necessary. According to evidence introduced during the trial, Cheney clipped the article and jotted a note on it: "did his wife send him on a junket?"

Shortly afterward, Plame Wilson's name was leaked as a CIA operative, appearing first in a column written by Robert Novak. A federal investigation was launched, and special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald interviewed many administration insiders, including Libby, as well as several influential Washington journalists. The investigation focused on whether Plame Wilson's name was leaked as retaliation for her husband's article and to undercut his credibility.

Reached by telephone yesterday, Wilson said he believes Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence raises further suspicion about what role the president, vice president, and other top aides may have had in revealing his wife's identity.

Fitzgerald maintained after Libby's verdict that his false testimony and obstruction may have prevented a case from being brought for the original act of leaking the identity of an undercover intelligence operative.

Bush "has effectively guaranteed that there is no incentive for Mr. Libby to tell the truth about what really happened," Wilson said, adding that his wife "is just as outraged as I am."

Bush's action came at a time when many Democrats and some Republicans have called for a continued investigation into how the president went to war. Some Democrats had hoped the investigation that led to Libby's conviction would unearth fresh information about how the administration manipulated journalists and the Congress with misleading information about the allegation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Analysts said Bush's decision demonstrated the continuing influence of Cheney, who issued a statement after the sentencing that he was "deeply saddened" by the 30-month term. "Speaking as friends, we hope that our system will return a final result consistent with what we know of this fine man," Cheney and his wife, Lynne, said at the time.

While there has been considerable speculation that Bush would commute Libby's sentence or pardon him, the swiftness of the decision surprised many political observers because it came before Libby exhausted his legal appeals.

"I'm surprised it was this quick. There were other appeals that could have been taken," said University of Richmond School of Law professor Carl Tobias. Tobias noted that the three-judge panel is composed of two Republican appointees and one Democratic appointee, which indicates Libby might have had a tough time winning an appeal. "They were unanimous and these were not what anybody would consider left-wing judges," Tobias said.

During the sentencing hearing, Fitzgerald urged US District Judge Reggie Walton "to make clear and loud that truth matters and one's station in life does not." Walton, in announcing the sentence, said "it is important we expect and demand a lot from people who put themselves in those positions. Mr. Libby failed to meet the bar."

‘‘I came to understand that providing payment services to online gambling businesses serving customers in the United States was wrong,’’ Lawrence said prior to entering his plea.

Lawrence, 47, faces as much as five years in prison on the charge. Sentencing is set for Oct. 29.

John David Lefebvre, another Neteller founder, and Lawrence were arrested and charged with conspiracy in the matter in January. Lefebvre is awaiting trial.

As part of his plea agreement with the government, Lawrence agreed to cooperate with its investigation and agreed to a forfeiture of $100 million.

Lawrence, who lives in the Bahamas, was Neteller’s chairman until May 2006 and left its board last October, while Lefebvre was the company’s president from October 2000 to 2002 and served on the board until December 2005.

Neteller, which is publicly traded in London, has said Lawrence and Lefebvre are no longer affiliated with the company. Neteller has stopped handling transactions involving online gambling from U.S. customers.

Electronic Clearing House Inc., another online payment processing company, entered a nonprosecution agreement with the government in March and agreed to disgorge $2.3 million. Neteller was one of its customers.

U.S. authorities have cracked down on online gambling in recent months, arresting executives of some overseas online gambling firms when they travel to the United States.

President Bush signed into law legislation in October that makes it illegal for banks and credit card companies to process payments from U.S. customers to online gambling sites.

Court personnel said it had been 60 years since justices had rejected an appeal petition and then reversed themselves and voted to hear the claim.

The switch may reflect frustration among the court's more liberal and centrist members over the Bush administration's handling of the Guantanamo issue, according to civil liberties lawyers who have been battling with the government.

Three years ago, the court ruled that the hundreds of prisoners at the U.S. military facility in southern Cuba were entitled to a hearing before a neutral judge to challenge the government's basis for holding them. In a rebuke to the high court, President Bush and the then-Republican-controlled Congress enacted a law to strip these "unlawful enemy combatants" of their right to be heard in the federal courts.

Friday's order may signal that a majority of the justices are prepared to rule that the Constitution's habeas corpus guarantee gives the Guantanamo detainees the right to go to court and contest the government's reason for holding them.

"The Supreme Court, along with the rest of the nation, should be sick and tired of what it's seeing in Guantanamo," said Matthew MacLean, an attorney for four Kuwaiti detainees at the prison. "It's anybody's guess what changed the Supreme Court's mind, but I hope the justices are seeing the discomfort that so many people in this country and abroad have with Guantanamo."

White House National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe reacted to the justices' announcement by saying: "We did not think that court review at this time was necessary, but we are confident in our legal position."

The prison may be closed before the court acts. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has said he would like to move the detainees to another location, and congressional Democrats have threatened to cut off funding for the current facility.

Despite years of legal skirmishing, little progress has been made in establishing a system for deciding who is a dangerous foreign fighter who should be held prisoner.

Although former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld once described the Guantanamo prisoners as the "worst of the worst," many of them have been released.

Since terrorism suspects were first brought to Guantanamo five years ago, the Bush administration has argued that foreign fighters who are not part of a regular army have no rights in American law and also are not prisoners of war entitled to rights under the Geneva Convention.

However, in response to the high court's 2004 ruling, the Pentagon did agree to review the status of each prisoner held at Guantanamo.

During a Combatant Status Review Tribunal, three military officers examine the evidence. The detainee does not have a lawyer.

Last week, an Army lawyer who has participated in several such hearings questioned their fairness. Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham filed a sworn statement in one appeal before the Supreme Court that said officers were pressured to rule in favor of keeping the detainees in prison as "enemy combatants."

"I certainly think the Abraham declaration proves what everyone has long surmised, that the CSRT process is just a kangaroo court that doesn't provide any meaningful review," said David Cynamon, the lead attorney in one of the cases the high court will consider, Al Odah vs. Bush. "It seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back."

Cynamon's client, a Kuwaiti named Fawzi Al Odah, has been held for six years with no charges filed against him.

The case has been consolidated with another involving six Algerian men who lived in Bosnia in the 1990s. They were arrested by Bosnian police in 2001 on suspicion of involvement in terrorism, but the following year the Supreme Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina ordered them released for lack of evidence.

They were immediately taken into custody by the U.S. military, shackled, put under hoods and shipped to Guantanamo, where they have been held since.

The lead plaintiff, Lakhdar Boumediene, was kept in a cold cell and deprived of sleep for 13 consecutive days, according to a report by the Center for Constitutional Rights, an advocacy group representing a number of the detainees.

In April, three of the court's liberal justices — Stephen G. Breyer, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg — voted to hear the pair of Guantanamo cases. Justices John Paul Stevens and Anthony M. Kennedy said they were willing to wait while the detainees and their lawyers went through an appeal process created by Congress, but the justices agreed that the issues involved were important.

The lawyers for Boumediene and Al Odah petitioned the justices to reconsider, because their clients faced many months of appeals that would almost certainly fail.

Friday's order did not say who voted to take up the case, but the lawyers involved assumed that Stevens and Kennedy had supplied the fourth and fifth votes.