“Same-sex marriage bill stalls in political wrangle”: This article appears today in The Toronto Globe and Mail.

And that newspaper today also contains an op-ed by John Ibbitson entitled “Conservatives keep winning battles in their war on same-sex marriage.”

“Sen. Smith sits above filibuster fray; Despite growing reputation as a moderate, lawmaker seeks up-or-down votes”: The Associated Press has this article today in The Salem (Ore.) Statesman Journal.

The Dayton Daily News today contains an article headlined “DeWine, Voinovich: Men of moderation; Ohio’s senators explain pivotal roles.”

The Louisville Courier-Journal’s Editorial Notebook asks “Where have the senators of yore gone?”

The Washington Times contains an op-ed by Tod Lindberg entitled “No need for GOP outrage” and an op-ed by Barry Casselman entitled “What really happened on the Hill?”

In The Chicago Sun-Times, Jesse Jackson has an op-ed entitled “Senate’s judicial deal is no victory.”

In The Naples (Fla.) Daily News, Dan K. Thomasson has an op-ed entitled “Frist’s bumbling performance.”

And online at OpinionJournal, Brendan Miniter has an essay entitled “The McCain Myth: The moderation that makes him a Senate powerhouse will keep him out of the White House.”

“More Montana voters say federal courts too liberal”: The Billings Gazette contains this article today.

In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times: An article reports that “Math Doesn’t Add Up for a Democrat-Run Senate; The party needs to win seats in Bush territory for any realistic chance to retake the chamber.”

And in other news, a front page article is headlined “A Late Decision, a Lasting Anguish; A Kansas doctor is under investigation for performing abortions others won’t; His clients say outsiders can’t grasp their pain or gratitude.”

“Bush’s Political Capital Spent, Voices in Both Parties Suggest; Poll Numbers Sag as Setbacks Mount at Home and Abroad”: This news analysis, which mentions the judicial filibuster compromise, will appear Tuesday in The Washington Post.

The U.S. Supreme Court can now decide for itself whether its earlier ruling in Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc. concluded the case in defendants’ favor: A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, over the dissent of three other judges from the denial of rehearing en banc, decided in an opinion you can access here that the Supreme Court’s ruling did not finally resolve the case in defendants’ favor.

In March 2005, as I noted here, the defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court seeking final resolution of the case in their favor.

I have now posted online these additional documents filed with the Supreme Court in the case: plaintiffs’ brief in oppposition; the amicus brief of Alabama and seven other States; the amicus brief of Consistent Life, et al.; the amicus brief of Concerned Women for America; and defendants’ reply brief in support of the petition for writ of certiorari.

The Supreme Court has scheduled the case for its June 9, 2005 conference.

“State Attorneys General Ask Supreme Court to Hear 2 Reporters’ Case”: As I noted earlier here, Adam Liptak had this article in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times. More recently, I obtained an electronic copy of the amicus brief and have posted it online at this link.

“The McCain mutiny”: Today in The Washington Times, Thomas Sowell has an op-ed that begins, “After all the glowing words surrounding the Senate ‘compromise’ in which the Republicans folded their hand despite holding all the high cards, it is worth taking a look at who won what and why.”

In yesterday’s issue of The Birmingham News: Steven L. Taylor had an op-ed entitled “Pryor not out of the mainstream.” And columnist Tom Scarritt had an op-ed entitled “Choosing judges is 1-man job.”

“Scrushy on Trial: Class, Race and the Pursuit of Justice in Alabama.” This article will appear in Tuesday’s edition of The New York Times.

Next Monday afternoon, the U.S. Senate once again begins debate on the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: The Senate is due to resume work at 2 p.m. on Monday, June 6, 2005. Via C-SPAN, you can view a portion of her Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing at this link (RealPlayer required). It’s one of the few judicial confirmation hearings that actually starts off interesting. The Judiciary Committee print of the hearing can be accessed here (371-page PDF document). A cloture vote on her nomination should occur by the middle of next week, and an up-or-down vote on the nomination is likely either later next week or early the following week.

Update: I have updated this post to reflect that the U.S. Senate is in recess all this week.

The filibuster lasted nine innings: With the Philadelphia Phillies, Trenton Thunder, and Reading Phillies all on the road out of the region this holiday weekend, the quest for baseball today takes my son and me on a road-trip to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to watch the Harrisburg Senators (AA club for the Washington Nationals) battle the Erie Sea Wolves (AA club for the Detroit Tigers). This will be our first visit to Commerce Bank Park.

Update: Final score: Harrisburg Senators 5; Erie Sea Wolves 2.

“The Radicalization of American Legal Education: Why the Left’s Dominance Is Bad for Law Schools and the Law.” Law Professor Scott D. Gerber has this essay online at FindLaw today.

“On Filibuster and Stem Cells, GOP Bears Pain of Compromise”: Ronald Brownstein has this “Washington Outlook” essay today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Kansas City Star today contains an article headlined “Who’s an activist judge? Depends on your views.”

Newsday contains an editorial entitled “Second-term slump: Bush runs into trouble with Congress; maybe he should try playing nice.”

In The Chicago Sun-Times, columnist Robert Novak has an op-ed entitled “Cooperation falls apart in Senate.”

In The Topeka Capital-Journal, Gregory L. Schneider has an op-ed entitled “Will of the people nuked by compromise.”

And in The Lincoln Journal Star, columnist Don Walton has an op-ed entitled “Nelson, Hagel caught in nuclear fallout.”

“Inaccuracies in blogs are less pernicious than inaccuracies in the mainstream media”: So writes Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner in the final paragraph of his post titled “Blogging–A Response by Posner to a Comment” at “The Becker-Posner Blog.”

“Filibuster Deal Evaded Key Question on High Court Nominees”: Monday’s edition of The Washington Post will contain this news analysis.

Today’s issue of that newspaper, meanwhile, contained a Sunday Outlook essay by Carl Cannon entitled “The Uncompromising Mr. Bush” that begins, “Before good-government types go all weak in the knees about the Great Filibuster Compromise of 2005, they might do well to recall the Great Filibuster Compromise of 2004.”

“In Rising Numbers, Lawyers Head for Guantanamo Bay”: Neil A. Lewis will have this article Monday in The New York Times.

“Michigan judges pivotal in Senate showdown; Saad proves to be a lightning rod for opposition to Bush judicial nominees”: This article appears today in The Detroit News.

In news from Washington State: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer today contains articles headlined “Democrats open defense in vote trial; Mistakes made in Rossi counties, too, they argue” and “Some see court fight as a bore.”

In related coverage, The Seattle Times today reports that “Judge rules with eye to present and future.”

The Houston Chronicle is reporting: Today’s newspaper contains articles headlined “Yates prosecutors want case reviewed; Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will decide if her conviction should remain overturned” and “SMU lecturer takes heat for telling blog; The ‘Phantom Professor’ says it was an outlet and could be a movie.”

“A false report on turnpike mystery; A Ga. man is expected to admit implicating his estranged wife in the death of Jonathan Luna”: This article appeared earlier this month in The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“White House Researching Potential Justices”: The Associated Press provides this report.

“‘Pro-life’–with limits; Bushspeak: It’s immoral to trade one form of life to save others–except, of course, when you’re talking about the death penalty. Huh?” Columnist Clarence Page has this op-ed today in The Chicago Tribune.

“Appointing California Judges: No push for a partisan judiciary; Party loyalty not a major factor for Schwarzenegger.” Bob Egelko has this news analysis today in The San Francisco Chronicle.

“Injudiciously divided: The fight over judicial nominees spotlights the importance of the Circuit Courts of Appeals, which much more often than not have the final say in high-profile cases.” Gail Gibson has this article today in The Baltimore Sun.

Today in The Philadelphia Inquirer, political analyst Dick Polman has an article headlined “Deal may help tilt court to the right.”

The Washington Post reports that “Senate Setbacks Test Frist’s Influence; Bush Has Given Difficult Tasks to Him, Analysts Say.”

The Washington Times reports that “Filibuster battle altering ’08 presidential landscape.”

The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi reports that “Senate filibuster compromise was Lott’s idea, not McCain’s.”

James Kuhnhenn of Knight Ridder Newspapers reports that “Work on nominees could return Lott to ranks of GOP leadership.”

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports that “Filibuster resolution puts Pryor step ahead.”

FOXNews.com reports that “Saad Unlikely to See Confirmation Vote.”

From Michigan, The Associated Press offers reports headlined “Senator’s son chooses courtroom over big-time politics” and “Griffin nomination sparks memories of dad’s role in 1968 showdown.”

The State of Columbia, South Carolina reports today that “Graham sticks to role in partisan detente; After helping broker filibuster compromise, S.C. senator works with Democrats on Social Security.”

The Beaufort (S.C.) Gazette reports that “Graham leads bipartisan efforts in D.C.; U.S. senator receiving statewide criticism for crossing party lines.”

The Independent (UK) reports that “Setbacks pin ‘lame duck’ label on Bush.”

The June 6, 2005 issue of U.S. News & World Report contains an article headlined “Power Play: It was the oddest thing in Washington, a deal done from the center; The question now is: Can it hold?” The magazine also contains an essay by Gloria Borger entitled “Extraordinary Doings” and an essay by John Leo entitled “Time to Fix the Court.”

The Berkshire Eagle today contains an editorial entitled “Who are the judicial activists?”

The Arizona Republic contains an editorial entitled “Base instincts: GOP should check TV listings before condemning John McCain.”

In The San Jose Mercury News, Law Professor Kathleen M. Sullivan has an essay entitled “Battle for courts: What’s at stake.”

Bloomberg News columnist Ann Woolner has an essay entitled “Tattered White Flag Flies Over Senate’s Judge War.”

At Human Events Online, U.S. Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT) has an essay entitled “Nuclear Option Still on the Table,” while Mark R. Levin has an essay entitled “Call Them the Sellout Seven.”

Today in The Denver Post, Andrew Cohen has an op-ed entitled “Anti-judicial rhetoric scary; Senate merely forestalled an inevitable showdown.” And Ed Quillen has an op-ed entitled “Compromise? How un-American.”

In The San Francisco Chronicle, Martin F. Nolan has an essay entitled “Zealots survive filibuster debate; Neither party wins kudos for wisdom.”

In Newsday, Gregory Wawro and Eric Schickler have an op-ed entitled “The majority rules, but for how long? Senate Democrats have given up the filibuster fight, but history shows they could come back for another go-round.”

Online at The American Prospect, Morton Mintz has an essay entitled “Bush’s Judges Matter to Jane and Joe Sixpack: We’ll bet you a vial of Vioxx that it does.”

Today in The Providence Journal, M. Charles Bakst has an essay entitled “In Washington and R.I., Chafee performs high-wire act.”

In The Birmingham News, Law Professor Bryan K. Fair has an op-ed entitled “Filibusters offer United States special protections.”

In The State, columnist Lee Bandy has an op-ed entitled “Graham digs hole for himself.”

In The Daily Press of Hampton Roads, Virginia, Patrick M. McSweeney has an op-ed entitled “Republicans: Warner, Allen split over filibuster.”

In The San Antonio Express-News, Susan Ives has an op-ed entitled “In this joke of a Congress, funny filibuster serves a serious purpose.”

In The Washington Times, Jay Ambrose has an op-ed entitled “Tell McCain it’s ‘Joanie.’”

In The Sacramento Bee, Rick Horowitz has an op-ed entitled “News flash, Doc: You’re not the boss of all of us.”

And in The Sunday Times of London, Andrew Sullivan has an op-ed entitled “Old man McCain tries Bush’s crown for size.”

“Shadowy Preparations For Death; Use Of Petty Cash Kept Execution Arrangements Out Of Public Sight”: This article appeared yesterday in The Hartford Courant.

In today’s issue of The Los Angeles Times: David G. Savage reports that “High Court to Decide Prickly Cases Soon; By the term’s end, the justices are expected to rule on several hot-button issues, including religion and file sharing.”

And reporting from New London, Connecticut, Elizabeth Mehren has an article headlined “Homeowners’ World Is Not For Sale; Seven neighbors’ challenge to the use of eminent domain to raise more tax revenue goes all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Path Cleared for Rehnquist’s Retirement”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“When Court Clerks Rule”: David J. Garrow has this op-ed today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Judicial Nominee Compromise Under G.O.P. Pressure”: Sunday’s edition of The New York Times will contain this article.

And the Week in Review section of Sunday’s newspaper will contain a related article headlined “The Elusive Middle Ground: What Happened to Compromise?”

“U.S. Case Draws Vermont Into Debate on Death Penalty”: This article will appear Sunday in The New York Times.

“White House and Frist Dispatched DeWine and Graham to Cut a Deal?” The blog “Patterico’s Pontifications” offers this post.

“Judicial Takings and Givings”: The Washington Post today contains an editorial that begins, “The Supreme Court’s decision this week in the case of Lingle v. Chevron didn’t make big news.”

“Judicial Nominees Compromise Was Hard-Won”: David Espo of The Associated Press provides this very interesting report.

In commentary, meanwhile, The Washington Times today contains an editorial entitled “Gauging the nuclear fallout” and an op-ed by Terence P. Jeffrey entitled “One-sided deal.”

In today’s edition of The New York Times: Adam Liptak reports that “State Attorneys General Ask Supreme Court to Hear 2 Reporters’ Case.”

And in local news, “Judge Cuts Sentence of Student Who Traded Child Pornography.” My earlier report on the Second Circuit‘s ruling in this case, governed by a typo-plagued sentencing statute, can be accessed here.