“White House fights anti-Miers bloggers”: Patti Waldmeir provides this report in Friday’s edition of Financial Times.

The Dallas Morning News on Friday will report that “On Miers pick, the right fights itself; Conservatives at odds on whether nominee advances the cause.”

And The Washington Post on Friday will report that “As a Lawyer, Miers Focused on Policy; Right to Representation Was Key Theme.”

“Courts’ Slow Recovery Begins at Train Station”: This report from New Orleans will appear Friday in The New York Times.

“Prop. 77 Actions Raise Eyebrows; Critics Suggest Governor, Judicial Branch Were Too Cozy”: Linda Rapattoni has this interesting article today in The Daily Journal of California.

Available online at Slate: John Dickerson has an essay entitled “Laura and Harriet: Are the nominee’s critics sexist? Get serious.”

And Bruce Reed has a post titled “Elmer vs. Gantry: Why do so many friends come not to praise Harriet Miers, but to bury her?” at “The Has-Been.”

“Corporate America May Have a Friend in Miers; Corporate America Holds Fire on Miers Nomination”: Lawrence Hurley has this article today in The Daily Journal of California.

In commentary: Today in The New York Times, columnist David Books has an op-ed entitled “In Her Own Words” (TimesSelect) that begins, “Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none are more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself.”

In The Washington Post, Tina Brown has an op-ed entitled “You’ve Come a Long Way, Ladies.” And columnist Ruth Marcus has an op-ed entitled “A Supreme Moment of Ambiguity.”

At OpinionJournal, John Fund has an essay entitled “How She Slipped Through: Harriet Miers’s nomination resulted from a failed vetting process.” Peggy Noonan has an essay entitled “Fasten Your Beltway: It’s going to be a bumpy ride.” And Patrick J. Wright has an op-ed entitled “The Finest Court in the Nation: Hooray for Michigan justice.”

In The Boston Globe, columnist Thomas Oliphant has an op-ed entitled “A clumsy effort to spin Miers.”

USA Today contains an editorial entitled “Miers: Bush loyalist or free-thinking justice?”

In The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Bradley R. Gitz has an op-ed entitled “Politics vs. judging.”

In The St. Paul Pioneer Press, Law Professor David Stras has an op-ed entitled “Don’t trade independence for high-court term limits.”

In The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Linda P. Campbell has an op-ed entitled “Opening the faith door.”

In The Rocky Mountain News, columnist Mike Littwin has an op-ed entitled “Heaven knows where Dobson will go.”

In The Washington Times, William Murchison has an op-ed entitled “What the war is about.”

The Louisville Courier-Journal contains an editorial entitled “What Dobson knows.”

The Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts contains an editorial entitled “Bush to Miers’ critics: You’ve got to have faith.”

The Rutland (Vt.) Herald contains an article headlined “The Miers mess.”

Bloomberg News columnist Margaret Carlson has an essay entitled “If Laura Speaks Out, Miers Must Be in Trouble.”

In The Sioux Falls Argus Leader, columnist David Kranz has an essay entiteld “Johnson still open to hearing Miers out.”

In The Daily Texan, columnist James Burnham has an op-ed entitled “Bush nominee unacceptable.”

Ann Coulter has an essay entitled “Does This Law Degree Make My Resume Look Fat?”

FindLaw commentator Edward Lazarus has an essay entitled “Overall, The Miers Nomination Is Troubling – But It Does Have One Virtue.”

At National Review Online, Ned Rice has an essay entitled “The Man Who Couldn’t Be Borked: A Supreme face saver for President Bush.”

And online at Reason, Jeff A. Taylor has an essay entitled “Libs, Cons Punch Selves Silly in Miers Rope-a-Dope; Ol’ Dubya just might have a winning plan.”

“Reserving Judgment on Miers; Americans Show Less Enthusiasm for Second Supreme Court Nominee Than for Roberts”: This article (free access) appears today in The Wall Street Journal.

The New York Times reports today that “Bush Criticized Over Emphasis on Religion of Nominee.”

The Washington Post contains articles headlined “For Miers, Proximity Meant Power; Longtime Bush Confidante Became Gatekeeper of Access to the President” and “Role of Religion Emerges as Issue.”

The Los Angeles Times reports that “Miers’ Faith in Spotlight; Liberals worry that her evangelical Christianity played too big a role in her selection for justice.”

In The Chicago Tribune, Jan Crawford Greenburg and Jeff Zeleny report that “Push is on to salvage Bush pick; White House takes new tack to calm its base amid hostility.”

From Knight Ridder Newspapers, Stephen Henderson reports that “ABA’s probe of Miers’ record, rating may be key for confirmation.” And Ron Hutcheson reports that “Religion takes center stage in Miers’ confirmation battle.”

The Dallas Morning News contains articles headlined “Conservatives fear Rove missed boat on Miers; Bush’s judicial czar had hands full with legal woes, they suspect“; “Nominee faces loyalty questions; Committee asks Miers if she made promises about how she’d rule“; and “Religion is part of Miers’ life, Bush says; Democrats see talk of evangelical roots as way to assure conservatives.”

In The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein reports that “Affirmative Action Erupts as an Issue In Bush’s Choice.” And in related coverage, “Dobson Denies Assurances on Miers.”

In The Boston Globe, Charlie Savage reports that “Bush, promoting Miers, invokes her faith; Aims to win trust of conservatives.”

USA Today contains an article headlined “Bush: Focus on Miers’ faith OK; Evangelical beliefs used to reassure conservatives.”

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Miers’ religion helps define her, president says.”

Newsday contains an article headlined “Bush: Harriet Miers’ faith had role in nomination; Bush comment on nominee’s religion comes as he tries to quell a rebellion on the right.”

The Houston Chronicle reports that “Bush hails team’s talk about Miers’ religion; People for and against the high court nominee say focus should be on her job experience; Democrat signals party’s intent to fight.”

The Washington Times reports that “Bush backs focus on Miers’ beliefs.”

The Rocky Mountain News reports that “Bush touts Miers’ faith; Statement comes amid controversy spurred by Dobson.”

The Denver Post reports that “Dobson backed, attacked on talk; Lawmakers split on Miers ‘scoop’; The conversation between the evangelical leader and Karl Rove about the Bush nominee is causing static.”

The Rutland Herald reports that “Leahy takes Bush at his word on Miers.”

And The Arkansas News Bureau reports that “Lincoln needs more information on Supreme Court nominee.”

“Justices Grapple With Whether Public Employees Enjoy Free-Speech Rights on the Job”: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The Washington Post, Charles Lane reports that “Los Angeles Prosecutor’s Workplace Suit Heard.”

And in The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “High Court Considers L.A. Case on Free Speech; The justices will rule on whether public employees have a right to speak out on disputes in the workplace; Signs are they’ll say no.”

Time Inc. finds settlement too Pricey: The El Paso Times reports today that “Time Inc. wants Price lawsuit settlement thrown out.”

The Birmingham News reports today that “SI seeks to dissolve settlement.”

The Associated Press reports that “Time Inc. Wants Price Settlement Tossed.”

And in related coverage, law.com reports that “‘Sports Illustrated’ Libel Case Raises Troublesome Issues.”

Available online from law.com: An article is headlined “Miers and the Supreme Court: Getting Down to Business; While working her way up in her firm, Miers handled corporate clients like Microsoft and Disney.”

And in other news, “DOJ Seeks Supreme Court Review of Tobacco Ruling; Justices asked to decide whether cigarette companies can be hit with $280 billion penalty for past behavior.”

“Wilson has submitted compelling evidence showing that the prosecutor in his case regularly acted with discriminatory animus toward African-American jurors. This evidence, coupled with the fact that numerous African-Americans were stricken from his jury, gives rise to an almost unavoidable inference that the prosecutor engaged in prohibited discrimination in this case.” Today, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an opinion that explains:

In 1997, Jack McMahon, the Assistant District Attorney who prosecuted Wilson’s first case, won the Republican nomination to challenge incumbent District Attorney Lynne Abraham. On March 31, 1997, eleven days after the primary election, Abraham released a videotape from the late 1980s which showed McMahon giving a training session on jury selection to other prosecutors in the District Attorney’s Office. In the tape, McMahon makes a number of highly inflammatory comments implying that he regularly seeks to keep qualified African-Americans from serving on juries. Since these comments are central to this appeal, we will quote from them at length.

You can access the complete opinion at this link.

“Searching Miers’ writings for First Amendment clues”: Tony Mauro has this article online at the First Amendment Center. Tony writes: “The most extensive look at Miers’ First Amendment views and activities so far comes in a report by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which routinely studies nominees’ views on press issues.”

“White House: Miers won’t withdraw; High court nominee’s record unsettles some conservatives.” CNN.com provides this report.

The Associated Press provides a report headlined “U.S.: Miers Won’t Withdraw Top Court Nod.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. Senate Asks Miers If She Made Promises on Court Rulings.” The Senate Judiciary Committee‘s questionnaire can be accessed here.