We have agreed to the following:
Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations
A. Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit).
B. Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).
Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations
A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.
B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, where each of us believes that all of us have acted in good faith in determining whether or not extraordinary cicumstances exist, and all of us have voted for cloture where such circumstances do not exist, we to that extent commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.
There is no "loophole." This is a memorandum of understanding that is based on trust and good will, not a legally enforceable contract.
We'll see how this works out. I am not sure that the impact is as simple as preventing GOP-led rule change in 109th without having any impact on how Dems deal with future nominees. A literal reading of this agreement might lead to that conclusion, but that won't matter if Dems simply take "extraordinary" to mean they will just filibuster whoever the heck they want.