Available online from law.com: Jeff Blumenthal reports that “Roberts Seen as the Warm-Up in High Court Battle.”

In other news, “11th Circuit Rebuffs Sports Illustrated’s Effort to Shield Source.”

And an article headlined “Lawsuit Financing Industry Survives Appellate-Level Challenge” reports on a ruling that Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal issued last week.

In Tuesday’s issue of The Hill: Tomorrow’s newspaper will contain articles headlined “Right rift over Roberts” and “For ’08 Dems, a tough choice lies just ahead.”

A bow tie is no longer part of the baseball player’s uniform: Last Tuesday, I had a post titled “U.S. Supreme Court Justices don’t bat, but tomorrow night one will pitch.” You can access here and here photographs of Justice John Paul Stevens throwing out the first pitch at last Wednesday night’s Chicago Cubs game, against the Cincinnati Reds. Justice Stevens was wearing a Cubs home jersey in place of his customary bow tie. Of course, once upon a time a baseball player’s uniform included a bow tie (see here, here, and here, for example). For those keeping score, the Reds defeated the Cubs 7-4 in 11 innings.

“Smile for the camera”: Today in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, columnist Linda P. Campbell has an op-ed that begins, “No one asked John G. Roberts Jr. whether he was a literalist about the First Amendment.”

“Bush’s Next High Court Nominee”: Brian McGuire has this op-ed today in The New York Sun.

“The Ten Commandments: an Everett civics lesson”: This editorial appears today in The Seattle Times.

For those awaiting the chance to spend hundreds of dollars on a Justice Antonin Scalia bobblehead doll: Your moment has arrived, here at eBay, where the current bid (as of the time this post first appeared) is a mere $75.99.

Meanwhile, my post from this weekend seeking to encourage the development of a Justice Scalia bobblehead doll certificate redemption service has yet to generate a groundswell of enthusiastic support, although one reader was willing to offer his services for $50 per certificate/Scalia doll shipped.

Also this weekend, as earlier noted here, a Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist bobblehead doll sold at auction on eBay for more than $2,000.

“O’Connor Prepares for Final Days on Court”: Gina Holland of The Associated Press provides this report.

“Wine shipping issue lingers; Out-of-state vintners still not allowed to ship to Michigan residents despite high court ruling”: The Detroit News yesterday contained an article that begins, “Although the U.S. Supreme Court declared four months ago that Michigan discriminates against out-of-state wineries by not allowing them to ship to its residents, no out-of-state wine has been arriving on Michigan doorsteps.”

“Don’t Expect Roe’s End With Roberts, GOP Senator Says; Lindsey Graham says the chief justice nominee’s conservatism is based on law, not partisanship”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

Under Florida law, life insurance contracts become incontestable two years after issuance, even if an impostor instead of the insured had undergone the requisite medical exam: A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued this opinion today.

Roberts vs. Scalia and Thomas: How different are they after all? The organization People For the American Way has today posted online this analysis.

“Bush Turns Attention to 2nd Court Vacancy”: The Associated Press provides this report.

Available online from The Weekly Standard: The September 26, 2005 issue of the magazine contains an editorial entitled “Chief Justice Roberts: The distinction between law and politics that the Judiciary Democrats do not respect lies at the heart of Roberts’s approach to judging.”

And online, you can access an essay by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross entitled “Expanding Rights vs. Protecting Rights: Why the judicial branch should not be deciding our culture wars.”

“John Roberts, the progressive”: This editorial appears today in The Christian Science Monitor.

“Abortion & Precedent: What John Roberts really said.” Edward Whelan has this essay today at National Review Online.

And NRO today also offers an essay by Michigan Supreme Court Justice Stephen Markman entitled “Clarifying ‘Extremism’: It’s more than just politics.”

Available online at Reason: Matt Welch has an essay entitled “Why The New York Times ♥s Eminent Domain; Elite newspapers and liberal activists embrace the Kelo decision at their long-term peril.”

And Jacob Sullum has an essay entitled “Jail, or Jail Not; There Is No Try; Chief Justice Roberts will help decide whether an indefinite war requires indefinite detention.”

“A December Court Battle?”: Today’s edition of Roll Call contains an article (subscription required) that begins, “The White House and Senate Republicans are facing a tight calendar as President Bush eyes his second pick for the Supreme Court, a nomination process that could last well into December under even the rosiest of scenarios.”

The article goes on to note that “If Bush waits until after Roberts clears the Senate to announce the new pick, the week after Thanksgiving would be the earliest the full Senate would take up the nomination, according to recent history of nomination fights.”

“Who’s next? With Roberts’ nomination for chief justice on track, attention now turns to filling Justice O’Connor’s seat and the names on President Bush’s short list.” This article appears today in The Sacramento Bee.

“Lindsey Graham’s Smear: No, Ruth Bader Ginsburg does not advocate pederasty.” Timothy Noah has this chatterbox essay online at Slate.

Marcia Coyle is reporting: In today’s issue of The National Law Journal, she has articles headlined “2005-2006 Supreme Court Preview: Burning issues await” and “Business hopes for an informed view from Roberts.”

“Why Must We Roll The Dice On A New Chief Justice?” Stuart Taylor Jr. has this essay today in National Journal.

“Blawg Review #24”: Available here, at “Jaybeas Corpus.”

“Benchmarks of activism”: Today in The Washington Times, David Limbaugh has this Pledge of Allegiance-related op-ed.

Available online from The New York Times: Today’s newspaper contains an editorial entitled “One Father, Back in Court, Indefatigable.” And Law Professor Ann Althouse has an op-ed entitled “Innocence Abroad.”

Yesterday’s newspaper, meanwhile, contained an op-ed by Robert P. George entitled “The Supreme Court’s Private Life.”

“Roberts vote holds risks for Democrats; Strategists weigh political message, fallout for ’08 race”: The Boston Globe contains this article today.

The Washington Times today contains an article headlined “Bush’s high court balancing act.”

And in The New York Sun, Josh Gerstein reports that “Bloomberg’s Stance on Roberts Ratchets Up Pressure on Clinton.”

In commentary, The Boston Globe contains an editorial entitled “Roberts’s qualities.”

The Montgomery Advertiser contains an editorial entitled “Roberts clearly has temperament.”

The Harvard Crimson contains an editorial entitled “Fit to be Chief: We are hopeful for the future of the Court under the lead of Justice Roberts.”

In The Washington Post, Al Kamen’s “In the Loop” column is entitled “For Liberals, Easy Does It With Roberts.”

In The Chicago Sun-Times, columnist Robert Novak has an op-ed entitled “Schumer is no match for Roberts.”

In The Washington Times, Donald Lambro has an op-ed entitled “Senatorial follies…,” a headline that concludes in Mark Steyn’s op-ed entitled “…in review.”

In Newsday, columnist Raymond J. Keating has an op-ed entitled “Schumer wants to keep tight reins on commerce.”

In The Daily Texan, Matthew Nickson has an op-ed entitled “Anticipating Justice Roberts.”

In The Topeka Capital-Journal, Gregory L. Schneider has an op-ed entitled “Law schools could use some conservatives, too.”

And in The Colorado State Collegian, Jake Blumberg has an op-ed entitled “History in the Making.”

“Roberts: High court’s qualifications are met.” This editorial appears today in The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi. And the newspaper also contains an op-ed by Luther T. Munford entitled “Roberts vital as court ‘litigator’; Roberts has actual experience in handling cases before high court.”

Today in The Boston Globe, columnist Jeff Jacoby has an op-ed entitled “Answer the questions.” And Joan Vennochi has an op-ed entitled “Pro-choice, out of touch.”

In The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware, Jay Ambrose has an op-ed entitled “It was Biden versus Roberts.”

In The Oregonian, columnist David Reinhard has an op-ed entitled “Chief Justice John Roberts: Play Ball!”

In The San Jose Mercury News, Vikram Amar has an op-ed entitled “The Roberts hearings? Blah and more blah.”

The Orlando Sentinel contains an editorial entitled “Confirm Roberts: John Roberts is highly qualified to be the court’s chief justice.”

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains an editorial entitled “What will the chief justice’s legacy be?”

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune contains an editorial entitled “A qualified enigma; Roberts: intelligent, knowledgable, evasive.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram contains an editorial entitled “Playing ball.”

In The Ventura County Star, Gary M. Galles has an op-ed entitled “Proper question is: Which principles inform court’s activity?”

In The Arizona Republic, columnist E.J. Montini has an op-ed entitled “The judge and I: From the supreme to the ridiculous.”

And In The Washington Times, Cal Thomas has an op-ed entitled “Roberts’ rules.”

Roberts wins Emmy award: Sure, his performance at last week’s Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing was masterful, but this is a bit much.

“Roberts sows seed of doubt for activists of left and right”: Patti Waldmeir will have this article Monday in Financial Times.

“A Supreme Bank Shot: How the vote on John Roberts may shape the fight over the next pick.” This article will appear in the September 26, 2005 issue of Newsweek. The magazine will also contain an essay by columnist George F. Will entitled “Mr. Breyer’s ‘Modesty’: The Framers made the federal government stronger because of the alarming quantity and dismaying quality of ‘active liberty’ in the states.”

And the September 26th issue of Time will contain a Notebook item headlined “The Roberts Effect.”

“Under robes, Roberts is a party animal”: Columnist John Kelso has this op-ed today in The Austin American-Statesman.

“In the law he trusts; Judge in pledge case, though not without his critics, has reputation as passionate protector of Constitution”: Claire Cooper, legal affairs writer for The Sacramento Bee, has this article today in that newspaper.

“Roberts Drops Hints in ‘Precedent’ Remarks”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

Today in The San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko reports that “Roberts keeps views under wraps; Top court nominee says neutrality is vital.”

The Hartford Courant reports that “Democrats Like Roberts, But Approval Carries Risks.”

In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Michael McGough has a news analysis headlined “Roberts a Scalia/Thomas clone? Most experts see him diverging often from sitting justices.”

Newsday reports that “Right could be caught in middle by Roberts.”

The Iowa City Press-Citizen reports that “Roberts doesn’t surprise UI professor.”

The San Bernardino County Sun reports that “Students, professors discuss Roberts.”

And The Trenton Times reports that “N.J. likely to stay pro-choice.”

“No Clarence Thomas: Roberts Hearings Fail to Stir D.C. Passions.” Bloomberg News provides this report.

“Detainee issues await new court; Questions about Guantanamo Bay practices and policies are a subplot at hearings on the nomination of John Roberts as chief justice”: This article appears today in The Miami Herald.