All eyes are on nominee

WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats promised yesterday to scrutinize the positions of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. on key social issues, and said they intend to force him to clearly state his position on whether the Constitution gives women a right to abortion during his upcoming confirmation hearings.

As Roberts made the rounds yesterday on Capitol Hill, Democratic senators gave him a warm reception, but served notice to their Republican colleagues that they want to see memos Roberts produced as deputy solicitor general under President George H.W. Bush, whose administration advocated the reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. The current Bush administration has fought the release of such documents in the past.

Leading Democrats conceded that, barring a major revelation or a surprise during the confirmation hearings, it is highly unlikely that Roberts's nomination will be derailed by a filibuster, a legislative tool they have used to stop some of Bush's nominees. Still, Democrats said Roberts should expect to face tough questions and give detailed answers during his confirmation hearings -- including his views on abortion, environmental laws, civil rights, and government protections against corporate abuses.

Those questions could throw hurdles before a nomination that otherwise seems to have few barriers to easy confirmation.

''The key question is whether he will uphold core constitutional and statutory principles," Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a speech on the Senate floor. ''Americans deserve to know if nominees will be on the side of justice and individual liberties, or if they will side with powerful special interests."

In his career as a federal appellate judge, as a lawyer in private practice, and as a Republican administration lawyer friendly with Democrats, Roberts has given conflicting signals about where he stands on the constitutional protection of abortion, which the Roe v. Wade decision established. Abortion rights groups have been vocal in opposing his nomination.

Still, while liberal interest groups continued to criticize Roberts's record yesterday, Democratic senators primarily praised President Bush's choice, leading top Republicans to predict swift confirmation for Roberts.

''We may get this done without a big blood bath," said Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi and a former majority leader. ''While he shares the views of the president with regard to the Constitution's values, he's not a confrontational guy."

No senator has publicly declared opposition to Roberts, and several moderate Democrats, such as Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, and Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, seemed to think Roberts's prospects for confirmation are good.

Roberts's first day as the man the president selected to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was reserved for formal niceties on Capitol Hill. Senate majority leader Bill Frist ushered Roberts into the Capitol via the rarely used front steps, and Roberts visited top Republican and Democratic leaders in the Senate for courtesy calls and photo opportunities.

Earlier in the day, Bush met Roberts for coffee at the White House and reiterated his request that the Senate confirm his nominee before the court's next term begins in the fall.

The Democrats' calls for documents and answers on hot-button issues, however, spurred a clash with Republicans.

Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, mocked Kennedy for suggesting that Roberts declare which ''side" he supports. ''I think it's clear to anyone who's taken high school civics in America that judges are not supposed to be on either side," Cornyn said. ''Judges are supposed to be like umpires calling balls and strikes," he added, ''and if judges are on the side of anyone or anything, they should be on the side of the law."

Cornyn accused Senate Democrats of following a ''game plan": to make endless demands for documents, to strong-arm Roberts for detailed answers, then to oppose him on the grounds that he has not been forthcoming.

Cornyn also argued that internal White House documents should not become public to protect candor in legal deliberations, and said no Supreme Court candidate should be forced to answer questions on issues that the court may face.

But the minority leader, Harry Reid, the Senate's highest-ranking Democrat, said Republicans should not be afraid of a full airing of the nominee's beliefs.

''The American people need to trust this nominee," Reid said. ''I don't know why people are running from this. I think we would all be better off as a country" if Roberts answers questions.

Though some Republicans said they want to ensure Roberts will not have to answer questions on issues the court will hear, Senate Judiciary Committee chair Arlen Specter, who supports abortion rights, indicated lawmakers will have another way to get Roberts to state his position on abortion.

Specter said senators should be able to ask questions about Roberts's respect for judicial precedents, including stare decisis -- the legal principle of following previously settled court decisions as a general rule. The committee's review will include an examination of how Roberts views Roe v. Wade, particularly given conflicting statements he has made over his career, Specter said.

''We'll be going into that subject in some detail," said Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican. ''If he has said that it is settled law, I think that it would be relevant to confirm the fact that that has been said. If the question is asked in the context of, 'Are you going to uphold Roe,' then I think that crosses the line on asking a question as to how you would make [a ruling] in a specific situation, which I think is beyond the pale."

In a brief he filed with the Supreme Court in 1991, Roberts argued that Roe v. Wade ''was wrongly decided and should be overruled." But he was a deputy solicitor general under George H.W. Bush at the time, and he said later that he was merely stating administration policy.

Two years ago, in Senate confirmation hearings for his current seat on the federal appeals court for Washington, Roberts called the Roe decision ''the settled law of the land."

But while a lower-court judge is bound to follow Supreme Court decisions, a justice on the high court is in a position to change established precedents.

Conservative groups have been far more accepting of Roberts's position on abortion, perhaps because he was selected by a president who has long stated that he wanted strong conservative judges for the Supreme Court.

Senator Sam Brownback, a leading conservative on the Judiciary Committee, said he wants to know more about Roberts' views on abortion but added that he would not press the point too far.

''I would certainly like to know more," said Brownback, a Kansas Republican. ''The standard has been not to prejudge cases. So I think the bigger issue -- what we'll probably know -- is his view toward the Constitution, whether he views it's a 'living document' or whether it's one to stay within the text of the Constitution."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday that the president had not asked Roberts about abortion or other issues: ''The president does not ask potential nominees their personal views on so-called 'hot-button issues.' He does not believe in litmus tests."

Dr. James Dobson, chairman of the conservative interest group Focus on the Family, said that while Roberts's personal views on abortion remain unknown, his commitment to interpret the Constitution in accordance with the ''original intent" of the men who wrote it makes him an outstanding choice.

''We do know he's an originalist," Dobson said. ''We believe the issues we care about will be handled carefully by this judge."

Roberts's nomination to the federal bench sailed through with little opposition in 2003; he was approved in the Senate on a voice vote. But Democrats are promising a fresh, comprehensive look at Roberts this time, and noted that the three Democrats who voted against Roberts in committee two years ago did so in part because he declined to answer questions about areas where he disagreed with Supreme Court rulings.

''The one thing we're quite unified on is the nominee has to answer questions and give us facts about not only his resume, but about his judicial philosophy and his views," said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who entered one of the three ''no" votes in committee.

Feinstein, a judiciary committee member who supports abortion rights, said she did not believe Roberts's nomination will be held up by Democrats, though she wants more information on his position on abortion.

But a fellow California Democrat, Senator Barbara Boxer, said she will review Roberts's record, then make up her mind.

Boxer said that just because Roberts isn't ''flamboyant" about his conservative beliefs does not make him automatically acceptable. ''The issue is the rights of the people, not the style of the justice," she said. ''At the end of the day, a vote is a vote on the court."