“Amy Coney Barrett’s Rise Is a Threat to Families Like Mine; Many of us thought gays and lesbians had won the marriage battle; Maybe not”: Kara Swisher has this essay online at The New York Times.

“GOP asks Supreme Court again to block PA ballot extension”: Marc Levy of The Associated Press has this report.

And Jonathan Lai of The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “Pennsylvania GOP again asks U.S. Supreme Court to block mail ballot deadline extension.”

Update: At his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen has a post titled “Understanding the Pennsylvania GOP Hail Mary Fighting the Extended Deadline for Receipt of Mailed Ballots, and the Awful Pressure that the GOP’s Petition Could Put on Soon-to-Be Justice Barrett.”

“An all-American nightmare: Brace for a massive crisis if a 5-4 Supreme Court decides this election.” Cristian Farias has this essay online at The New York Daily News.

“Murkowski, in a Turnabout, Says She Will Vote to Confirm Barrett; The iconoclastic Alaska Republican said she remained opposed to filling the Supreme Court seat so close to an election but could not hold that against a qualified nominee”: Nicholas Fandos of The New York Times has this report.

Colby Itkowitz of The Washington Post reports that “Sen. Murkowski says she will vote to confirm Barrett to the Supreme Court.”

Sam Fossum, Ted Barrett, Manu Raju, and Ali Zaslav of CNN report that “Murkowski announces she will vote yes to confirm Amy Coney Barrett.”

Lauren Egan of NBC News reports that “Murkowski reverses course, will vote to confirm Barrett to Supreme Court; The Republican senator from Alaska had initially opposed confirming a new justice to the Supreme Court so close to a presidential election.”

Marisa Schultz of Fox News report that “Lisa Murkowski announces support for Amy Coney Barrett during rare Saturday Senate session; A procedural vote is set for Sunday, final confirmation on Monday.”

Burgess Everett of Politico reports that “Murkowski to back Barrett, despite opposing election-year SCOTUS vote; Senate Republicans plan to confirm the Supreme Court nominee on Monday, over furious Democratic opposition.”

And Jordain Carney of The Hill reports that “Murkowski says she will vote to confirm Barrett to Supreme Court on Monday.”

“Despite rhetoric, GOP has supported packing state courts”: Andrew DeMillo of The Associated Press has this report.

Online at Politico Magazine, Jack Shafer has an essay titled “Biden’s Slippery Tactic to Snuff the Court-Packing Debate; Nothing beats a bipartisan commission for dodging a no-win controversy.”

And online at The Hill, law professor Jonathan Turley has an essay titled “Here are the worst proposals to reform Supreme Court.”

“The ACA Case Reveals the Politics of ‘Constitutionality’; The Court may well invalidate the law, but not without taking a considerable risk”: Law professor Nicholas Bagley has this essay online at The Atlantic.

“Supreme Court sides mostly with Republicans in last-minute voting cases; More rulings on election procedures with mail-in ballots in key battleground states are expected before Nov. 3”: Pete Williams of NBC News has this report.

“Stop Comparing Amy Coney Barrett to a Handmaid. She Would Be a Wife.” Olivia Beres has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Will my marriage survive? It’s up to the Supreme Court.” Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons has this essay online at The Courier Journal of Louisville, Kentucky.

And online at The Orlando Sentinel, Rodni Cruz has an essay titled “New Supreme Court puts birth-control access in danger.”

“Most of the money funding a campaign to unseat an Alaska Supreme Court justice comes from Outside”: Michelle Theriault Boots of The Anchorage Daily News has this report.

And Casey Grove of Alaska Public Media reports that “Campaign to unseat Alaska Supreme Court justice gets $10K donation from Outside.”

“The Supreme Court We Need”: Linda Greenhouse has this essay in the November 5, 2020 issue of The New York Review of Books.

“Senators engage in bitter floor feud over Barrett nomination to Supreme Court”: Seung Min Kim of The Washington Post has this report.

“The Supreme Court Doesn’t Need to Be Reformed; Proposals to pack the court, strip its jurisdiction or impose term limits all have their own flaws”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.

“Judges Share 50 Years as Colleagues and Friends”: The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts issued this news release today.

“Nina Totenberg On Amy Coney Barrett, Anita Hill And Saying Goodbye To RBG”: Nina Totenberg appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross, and you can access the audio via this link.

“Banning Abortion Is Only the Beginning for Barrett; The Supreme Court nominee is prepared to strike at the legal foundation undergirding rights to contraception, marriage equality, and more”: Julie F. Kay and Kathryn Kolbert have this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“Unpacking Joe Biden’s Court Packing Position: The nominee has walked back initial opposition and is now talking about establishing a bipartisan task force; What is he really planning to do?” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

“A Clash of Constitutions: We are in a period of political polarization unprecedented since at least the New Deal, and its waves have engulfed our fundamental document.” John O. McGinnis has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.

“Connecting California: School pals on Supreme Court short lists is too close for comfort.” Joe Mathews of Zócalo Public Square has this essay online at The Desert Sun of Palm Springs, California.

“Trump: I hope that the Supreme Court ends Obamacare; Only then, he told CBS News’s Lesley Stahl, will he introduce his unseen new health-care proposal.” Philip Bump of The Washington Post has this report.

“Biden Punts on Expanding the Supreme Court, Calling for a Panel to Study Changes; The Democratic presidential nominee said he would appoint a bipartisan commission to examine whether an overhaul is needed to the judiciary and to make recommendations”: Charlie Savage and Katie Glueck of The New York Times have this report.

“The Rhetoric of Court Packing Is Here; Democrats boycott the ‘sham’ and ‘illegitimate’ vote on Judge Barrett”: This editorial will appear in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.

“Biden promises commission on overhauling Supreme Court”: Annie Linskey of The Washington Post has this report.

Ken Thomas and Lindsay Wise of The Wall Street Journal report that “Biden Intends to Create Bipartisan Commission to Study Court Overhaul; In ’60 Minutes’ interview, the Democratic nominee says the court system is ‘getting out of whack.’”

David Sherfinski of The Washington Times reports that “Joe Biden plans to set up blue-ribbon commission on court changes.”

Sahil Kapur of NBC News reports that “Biden calls for ‘bipartisan commission’ to propose ways to ‘reform the court system’; Biden faces pressure to take a position on adding seats to the Supreme Court as Trump’s nominee advances toward a Senate vote.”

Sarah Mucha of CNN reports that “Biden says if elected he will form bipartisan commission to recommend changes to Supreme Court.”

Evie Fordham of Fox News reports that “Biden to look at court-packing ‘alternatives,’ form commission to ‘reform’ court system; Biden claimed that ‘a lot of conservative constitutional scholars’ agree the issue needs to be revisited.”

Caitlin Oprysko of Politico reports that “After dodging questions about court packing, Biden floats commission to study judicial reforms; Biden asserted in the interview that his proposed commission is ‘not about court packing.’”

Niels Lesniewski of Roll Call reports that “Biden’s court commission draws ire of court-packing critics and supporters; Ahead of debate, Biden punts on question of Supreme Court size.”

And John Bowden of The Hill reports that “Biden says he’ll set up commission to study reforming Supreme Court if elected.”

“Trump picks Indiana federal prosecutor to replace Barrett on 7th Circuit”: Johnny Magdaleno of The Indianapolis Star has this report on an announcement the White House issued yesterday.

“Republicans Advance Barrett’s Supreme Court Nomination Over Democratic Boycott; The action by the Judiciary Committee sets up a vote on Monday by the full Senate to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court”: Nicholas Fandos of The New York Times has this report.

Jennifer Haberkorn of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Senate Judiciary Committee advances Barrett nomination over Democratic boycott.”

Siobhan Hughes of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court Nomination Advanced by Senate Committee; Move comes over objection of Democrats to Republicans’ quickly filling Supreme Court opening.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Judiciary Committee votes to move Amy Coney Barrett forward for Supreme Court confirmation.”

Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick of The Associated Press report that “GOP-led Senate panel advances Barrett despite Dems’ boycott.”

Richard Cowan of Reuters reports that “Trump rejoices as Senate panel approves Barrett while Democrats boycott.”

Laura Litvan of Bloomberg News reports that “Barrett Nomination Clears Panel With Democrats Boycotting.”

Marianne LeVine of Politico reports that “Senate panel paves way for Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation; The vote went forward despite a Democratic boycott of the meeting.”

Todd Ruger of Roll Call has reports headlined “Senate Judiciary sends Amy Coney Barrett nomination to the floor with no Democratic votes; Confirmation on track for Monday vote” and “Supreme Court vote tears at Judiciary Committee relationships; Democrats are sending signals that nothing less than a no-holds barred judicial confirmation fight will do.”

Jordain Carney of The Hill reports that “Republicans advance Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination after Democrats boycott committee vote.”

And Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News reports that “Republicans Moved Amy Coney Barrett One Step Closer To The Supreme Court After Democrats Boycotted The Vote; Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to approve Barrett;s nomination; The final vote on her confirmation is expected Monday.”

“Republicans Set to Advance Barrett Nomination Amid Democratic Boycott; The action by the Senate Judiciary Committee would set up a vote on Monday by the full chamber to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court”: Nicholas Fandos of The New York Times has this report.

“What Does Amy Coney Barrett Mean for the Supreme Court? We know who her allies are, and we know how to read what she’s written or signed.” Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.

“Democrats to boycott committee vote on Barrett nomination to the Supreme Court”: Donna Cassata of The Washington Post has this report.

Jennifer Haberkorn of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Democrats plan to boycott Barrett committee vote, but GOP won’t let that slow her Senate confirmation.”

Lindsay Wise of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Democrats to Boycott Committee Vote on Amy Coney Barrett; Protest comes as Republicans aim to get Supreme Court pick confirmed by Election Day.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Senate Democrats to boycott committee vote for Amy Coney Barrett.”

Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick of The Associated Press report that “Democrats to boycott Barrett vote, Senate GOP pushes ahead.”

Richard Cowan of Reuters reports that “Republicans to push ahead with U.S. Supreme Court pick despite Democrats’ boycott.”

Manu Raju and Ted Barrett of CNN report that “Democrats planning to boycott Senate Judiciary vote to advance Barrett nomination.”

Morgan Phillips of Fox News reports that “Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham brushes off reports committee Democrats may boycott ACB vote.”

Marianne LeVine of Politico reports that “Senate Democrats to boycott Barrett’s Judiciary Committee vote Thursday.”

And Jordain Carney of The Hill reports that “Democrats to boycott committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination.”

“Supreme Court lets Alabama ban curbside voting in November election”: Richard Wolf of USA Today has this report.

Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court blocks curbside voting in Alabama, ending a pandemic election option; Voting rights advocates said the option would have made voting easier and safer during the Covid-19 pandemic.”

And at his “Election Law Blog,” Rick Hasen has a post titled “Supreme Court in Unsigned Order on 5-3 Vote Reinstates Alabama Ban on Curbside Voting; Justice Sotomayor Writes Dissent for Three Liberal Justices; What It Means.”

You can access tonight’s 5-to-3 order of the U.S. Supreme Court, and the dissent therefrom, at this link.

“GOP senators push to ban Supreme Court packing: ‘We’re sticking with 9’; Republicans filed a constitutional amendment to limit the number of Supreme Court justices to nine.” Marisa Schultz of Fox News has this report.

“9 ways to reform the Supreme Court besides court-packing; The Supreme Court threatens American democracy; Here’s how to stop it”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

“A 6-3 Supreme Court could allow the government to openly discriminate in its policies; Last term, the Justice Department glossed over the president’s true motives; Now the mask can come off”: Law professors Leah Litman and Kate Shaw have this essay online at The Washington Post.

“I Should Have Worn a Mask; It’s not a partisan or cultural symbol, not a sign of weakness or virtue”: Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has this essay online at The Wall Street Journal.

“The legal doctrine that could sway the election”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.

“Feinstein Faces Questions About Judiciary Committee Leadership; Senator would be first woman to lead panel if Democrats win the majority, but progressives want her to step aside”: Natalie Andrews has this article in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.