So far so good, but here's the rub:

The bill Leahy successfully moved to have reported out of committee only consisted of Title I of the bill they'd received, which contained most (if not all) of the non-controversial amendments to FISA.  The Bill's Title II, which contains the telco immunities and (I think) the basket warrants, was not a part of the bill they reported out of committee.  In other words, they decided to move the parts they agreed on, and punted on the parts they couldn't agree on, amputating them from the bill without voting on them one way or another.

NO Telecom Immunity in Senate FISA Bill (Updated)

Firedoglake has some play-by-play:

Here's what I know thus far this evening:

• The Feingold amendment stripping immunity out of the FISA bill was defeated in an 11-8 vote (UPDATE:  or possibly a 12-7 vote -- conflicting reports on this.).  Democrats voting against it were:  Feinstein, Whitehouse and Kohl.  (No idea as yet on which Republican voted for it, but I'm working on it.)

• The bill was reported out of the SJC for Title I only -- nothing on Title II/Immunity was reported out.  The final motion to report the bill out of committee without the immunity provisions passed with ten votes.

• The Specter "compromise" (read:  WH CYA) was never voted on today.

...
Update [2007-11-15 19:43:4 by MLDB]:One thing is for sure...Patrick Leahy deserves some love for this:

Lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary Committee approved 10-to-9 Thursday a bill authorizing the federal government's warrantless wiretapping program without a clause offering immunity to telephone companies that may have cooperated with the program.

Just minutes before the vote, the committee had voted 11-to-8 in favor of immunity for the phone companies.

Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Cal., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., voted with the nine Republicans on the panel in favor of preserving the immunity clause.

But in a strange twist that left many wondering what had happened, just minutes after this vote, Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, called for a separate vote to approve the bill without the section of the legislation with the immunity provisions.

The committee approved Leahy's call 10-9, along party lines.

That "strange twist" was Leahy saying "enough is enough"

I didn't realize that committee chairs have such powers. Perhaps this is what Reid means by "most likely"--i.e. his way of saying that he's not sure that he accepts what just happened since it appears to partly override the committee's will.

But if so, then why did Feinstein, Kohl and Whitehouse turn around and vote for the final bill, if it was stripped of immunity (albeit not via Feingold's amendment)?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "We have now included certain criteria the government must take into account in considering whether a warrant is required. This will help prevent inappropriate warrantless surveillance and reverse targeting of Americans under the guise of foreign intelligence. The bill restores checks and balances. This is very, very important because, again, it's part of our oath of office to protect the Constitution of the United States. The bill rejects groundless claims of inherent executive authority...

Rep. Holt: "The RESTORE Act now includes provisions via the manager's amendment that will ensure that it is the courts, not an executive branch political appointee, who decides whether or not the communications of American citizens are to be seized and searched, and that such seizures and searches must be done pursuant to a court order that meets the standard of probable cause

...aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have confirmed to me that the version of the FISA bill that was just reported out of the Judiciary Committee does not -- repeat, does not -- contain retroactive immunity for the telecom companies.

And a source close to Reid says that this is "most likely" the version that the Majority Leader will file a motion to proceed on.