Today, according to The Politico, the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are deciding whether they will hear the an appeal in the case of the raid on the office of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA).   The issue is the constitutionality of the FBI raid on the congressional office of Mr. Jefferson.  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled the raid was unconstitutional.  CREW called that decision "devastating to the investigation and prosecution of congressional corruption."  We could know next week if the Supreme Court will hear the case:

The Supreme Court will consider this Friday whether to take up a Justice Department request to overturn an appeals court ruling finding the May 2006 raid on Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) unconstitutional.

An announcement of the Supreme Court’s decision on whether it will take up the case could come as early as next Monday, although there is no way of actually predicting what the high court will do.

The Justice Department’s request, and a counter-motion by Jefferson’s legal team arguing against Supreme Court intervention, are scheduled to be “distributed for conference” among the justices this Friday. The Supreme Court could place the case on the “Orders List” released the following Monday, or or add the case to its schedule on a future list.

The Justice Department wants the Supreme Court to allow searches of congressional offices, arguing that leaving the August 2007 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - which found the FBI search an unconstitutional violation of Jefferson's privileges under the Speech or Debate Clause - is hampering ongoing criminal investigations of lawmakers.

Jefferson, who is being supported by a bipartisan group of senior House leadership aides, argues that the appeals court ruling was correct. Under the Speech or Debate Clause, legal action cannot be taken against lawmakers and staffers for legislative activities. Jefferson's legal team successfully argued on the appeals level that the FBI search of his office was unconstitutional.