John G. Roberts Jr., at 50 is already a veteran of judicial policy battles, as a Supreme Court clerk, as an attorney in an elite law firm, as an official in the Justice Department and most recently on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. President Bush delighted conservatives last night by nominating him to succeed Sandra Day O’Connor in the first Supreme Court opening in 11 years.
Roberts will, and should, face close scrutiny, and he deserves the Senate’s full consideration in one of the most anticipated confirmation processes in recent years.
Bush ignored a popular consensus, and his wife’s wishes, by selecting a man to replace O’Connor, and he set up what could be contentious nomination hearings by choosing in Roberts a fellow who once advocated the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Conservative activists had been worried Bush might go for a centrist in the mold of O’Connor. We favored just such an approach and hope that Roberts, if confirmed, won’t be an ideologue whose votes send the court in a more conservative posture than the country itself.
Roberts has a strong conservative record as a lawyer on key hot-button issues, including abortion, separation of church and state and environmental protection. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., one of the few senators to oppose Roberts’ 2003 appeals court nomination, laid out a perfectly sensible challenge. “Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a very broad range of questions,” Schumer said.
We hope, in turn, that Schumer and his colleagues and the special-interest groups from the left will keep their ammunition dry as Roberts’ begins to make his case.
Roberts has never dealt with abortion while serving on the bench. But as deputy solicitor general for President George H.W. Bush he was the lead lawyer in a 1990 abortion-related case in which the government argued unsuccessfully that Roe should be overruled. His votes on the matter as a Supreme Court judge would be critical since O’Connor was instrumental in protecting abortion rights.
Time and again, O’Connor was a voice for common sense and consensus values. Many Americans hoped Bush would look for someone in her mold. Along with First Lady Laura Bush, a majority hoped Bush would nominate a female. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is now the only female voice on the high court – a sad statement given the quantity and high quality of women on the bench.
Bush set a positive tone during the nomination process, consulting with some key senators while his staff did likewise. Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, one of those approached, said Tuesday night he would “judge the nominee on three basic principles: fairness, impartiality and a proven record of upholding the law.” All eyes will be on Salazar and other Senate moderates.
Roberts may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but he has a distinguished career at the bar and on the bench. The Senate should give him vigorous scutiny and fair consideration.
