Showing reserve, Democrats vow detailed look
WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats last night promised a thorough review of Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s record and quickly served notice that his views on abortion rights are likely to draw the most scrutiny during confirmation hearings that are expected to begin in September.
Minutes after President Bush's decision to name Roberts became public, Democrats circulated a portion of a legal brief Roberts filed when he was a deputy solicitor general under President George H. W. Bush in 1991. The brief argued that the Roe v. Wade opinion that established a constitutional right to abortion ''finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution."
With only two years of service on the federal bench, Roberts's record is far less known than many of the other leading contenders for the high court. Though his unknown qualities drew him generally cautious responses from Democrats, a series of lawmakers insisted that Roberts clarify his position on key issues, including whether he believes the Constitution protects abortion rights.
''The Senate must learn whether he has clear, consistent principles upholding constitutional standards like civil rights and the right to privacy in Roe v. Wade," said Senator John F. Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts. ''We know Judge Roberts is no Sandra Day O'Connor, and the White House has sent a clear signal."
The ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, promised a full scrub of Roberts's record and said past confirmation votes by the Senate shouldn't suggest that Roberts has a clear path to being confirmed.
''We expect full answers," Leahy said. ''No one is entitled to a free pass to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court."
Still, an all-out fight over Roberts appeared unlikely in the immediate aftermath of the nomination; indeed, liberal Democrats may not be able to sustain a filibuster to block him from being confirmed even if they wanted to. Roberts was confirmed to his current seat on a voice vote in 2003 -- a common move for less controversial nominees -- and received the support of six Democratic senators in the Judiciary Committee.
The Democrats who voted for Roberts in committee include five current members of the committee: Leahy, former chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, and Senators Herbert H. Kohl and Russell Feingold of Wisconsin.
Democratic leaders by policy consider filibustering only nominees who are unanimously opposed by the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, meaning all five of those Democrats would have to change their votes for a filibuster to even be on the table. In addition, moderate Democrats like Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, indicated a willingness to allow a vote on Roberts's nomination.
Senate minority leader Harry Reid issued a measured statement last night, declaring Roberts's legal credentials ''suitable," but promising not to ''prejudge" his nomination before his record is reviewed thoroughly by the Judiciary Committee.
''Now the Senate will do its job of deciding whether to confirm John Roberts to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court," said Reid, a Nevada Democrat. ''The Senate must review Judge Roberts's record to determine if he has a demonstrated commitment to the core American values of freedom, equality, and fairness."
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, vowed extensive questioning of Roberts -- particularly his ability to ''separate his personal ideology from the rule of law" -- but indicated he had an open mind about his nomination.
''Every American ought to be asking some tough questions right now about whether Mr. Roberts is fit to serve on the highest court in the land," said Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat. ''No nominee, especially a nominee who is well known to have argued ideological positions on issues important to the American people, should be confirmed without full and candid disclosure and discussion of those positions and their importance to him."
Republicans applauded the choice of Roberts -- and warned Democrats not to force him to answer questions about how he would rule on hot-button issues like abortion. Senator John Cornyn, a former member of the Texas Supreme Court who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Roberts should be allowed to resist questions from Democrats about how he would decide issues.
''It's really not appropriate to ask a nominee to make promises to politicians based on some platform of how they will perform," said Cornyn, a Republican who was himself rumored as a contender for the slot. ''Judge Roberts is an exceptional judge, brilliant legal mind, and a man of outstanding character who understands his profound duty to follow the law."
Responding to a persistent concern of Democrats, Senate Republicans were quick to applaud the White House for talking extensively with senators from both parties before announcing a choice. Senate majority whip Mitch McConnell called Bush's consultation ''unprecedented" and said yesterday afternoon, hours before he even knew whom Bush would nominate, that the nominee will be able to be confirmed before the Supreme Court term begins in October.
Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, Judiciary Committee chairman, said that encouraging comments from Democrats give him hope that the process will move smoothly.
Nonetheless, liberal groups pounced on aspects of his record that they said suggest an ultraconservative jurist who could threaten advances in civil rights and government protections from industry. His view of a limited scope for the federal government ''could threaten a wide swath of workplace, civil rights, public safety, and environmental protections," said Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice.
Dianne Luby, president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said Roberts's legal brief on Roe v. Wade is troubling for her group, and called on the Senate to question his stance on abortion aggressively. The National Abortion Rights Action League quickly sent an e-mail fund-raising appeal calling the selection of Roberts a ''devastating move."
Previewing an ad war that is expected to cost both sides millions of dollars, conservative organizations said they would defend Roberts. ''Judge Roberts is a man of great character who deserves genuine consideration, not automatic attacks and partisan indignation based on nothing other than the fact he was nominated," said Brian McCabe, president of Progress for America.
Rick Klein can be reached at rklein@globe.com. 