Investor's Business Daily - Supreme Court Nominee Roberts' Supporters & Opponents Grow Clearer as Hearings Near

August 25, 2005
by Sean Higgins

After a period of relative quiet, the political fight over Supreme Court nominee John Roberts heated up this week as major Washington players staked out formal stands.

Business groups and conservative activists firmed up their support while liberal groups rallied in opposition. All were laying the groundwork for them to attempt to sway Roberts' upcoming Senate hearings.

The endorsement from big business suggests the fight could get intense. It stood on the sidelines in prior nominations. No longer.

"He is highly regarded and well respected by the legal and business communities," said U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue in a statement Wednesday. "The chamber looks forward to participating in his confirmation process."

The National Association of Manufacturers signaled its support earlier this month.

Conservatives Rally

Several conservative groups followed the chamber in endorsing Roberts Wednesday. Among them was a group called Women for Roberts, which held a news conference at the National Press Club to urge the Senate to approve him.

Barely 100 yards away, in the same building and at the same time, People for the American Way, the top liberal group in the fight, announced its formal opposition. PFAW President Ralph Neas predicted other liberal groups will follow soon.

Until the last few days, the nomination started to look inevitable. No senator has formally come out against Roberts.

A strong endorsement by the American Bar Association boosted Roberts' prospects.

Yet activists from all sides caution that the process is in the early stage and hearings could be pivotal.

The idea that Roberts will be confirmed easily shouldn't be given too much weight, said PFAW's Neas.

"That was the conventional wisdom at this point in 1987 and 1991," Neas said, referring to the nominations of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. Bork's bid failed. Thomas was only narrowly approved.

Liberals Coming On

Although the fight is already polarized, the nominee himself has stirred surprisingly little debate. Even critics admit he's legally qualified for the job.

Both sides agree he's likely to be a small-government conservative.

Liberal groups are expressing the most urgency. Many have publicly fretted they've lost momentum by not making noise earlier.

Before this week, Naral Pro-Choice America, an abortion rights group, was alone in starting a major campaign against Roberts.

That campaign backfired when an ad linking Roberts to abortion clinic violence was widely criticized as inaccurate and misleading. Naral pulled the ad, saying it was misconstrued.

Terrill North, a lobbyist for Earthjustice, a legal group affiliated with the Sierra Club, said liberal groups are split on strategy.

"There are two views. One holds that we don't need to wait for anything. ... We know all that we need to oppose this guy right now," North said. "A second view says, well, what he did has given us reason for pause, but let's wait until he has a chance to say something (in the Senate)."

Another Way

People for the American Way was one of the latter groups but changed strategy Wednesday when it called on the Senate to reject Roberts.

"He truly is a wolf in sheep's clothing -- or, more accurately, an Antonin Scalia in sheep's clothing," Neas said.

He claimed Roberts would roll back civil rights, privacy rights and environmental protection.

Conservatives scoffed at Neas' claims.

Roberts "shows a respect for the text and principles of the Constitution, upholding the rights and provisions that it contains and refraining from inventing others that it does not," said Wendy Long, chief counsel to the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel to the American Center for Law and Justice, another key conservative group in the fight, called PFAW's announcement "predictable."

Sekulow said a 50-page report on Roberts issued by PFAW appeared to undercut some of its earlier arguments.

"First, PFAW argued that there were not enough documents available to examine the nominee's record," Sekulow stated. "Now PFAW issues a lengthy report critical of the nominee's record and judicial philosophy."

Some Democrats have taken a more aggressive stance.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a Judiciary Committee member, said Monday she intends to ask Roberts directly about abortion and other hot button issues.

Liberal groups say it is too soon for them to call for a Senate filibuster, but they haven't ruled it out. Nor do they think the public will object to a hard fight.

"They don't perceive of (the nomination) as something above the fray or something impartial, but as a political process," said Nancy Belden, a pollster for feminist groups.