Roberts Testimony Concludes

Chief Justice nominee John Roberts said Thursday there is no room for ideologues on the Supreme Court, declaring an "obligation to the Constitution" and to no other cause as he concluded three grueling days of confirmation testimony.

"If the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy's going to win in court before me," Roberts told the Senate Judiciary Committee. "But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy's going to win."

Roberts' confirmation as successor to the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist appears secure, the only question the size of his vote total and in particular his Democratic support. The Judiciary Committee is to vote its recommendation next week.

Roberts' views on abortion, and whether he would vote to overturn the landmark 1973 ruling on the issue, hung uncertainly over the hearings from beginning to end. "That's the big speculative question," summed up Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the committee chairman, moments after he declared the proceedings closed.

Urging senators to look at his two-year record as an appellate judge, Roberts said his 50 opinions would provide a sense of what type of judge he would be in what many expect will be decades on the high court.

"I don't think if you read those opinions, you'll say those are the opinions of an ideologue. That should convince you that I'm not an ideologue," Roberts said. "Look at my briefs and you'll conclude that's a person who respects the law."

Roberts cleared one of his last hurdles when Specter and top Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont announced that an FBI background check had found nothing that would disqualify. The American Bar Association also confirmed its "well-qualified" rating.

Republicans were confident that Roberts would win the committee's majority approval next week and then Senate confirmation, with the backing of some moderate Democrats, before the Supreme Court term begins Oct. 3, to become the nation's 17th chief justice.

Committee Democrats have yet to commit to vote for Roberts, but they know they cannot stop him and President Bush will soon follow with yet another nomination to the court.

"It's going to take some time of real careful thinking about what to do" on the vote, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said after the hearing.

A CBS News/New York Times poll finds more Americans are following the confirmation battle than just a couple of weeks ago: 54 percent say they are following it closely, up from 44 percent two weeks ago.

But most Americans say they can't offer an opinion as to whether or not Roberts should be confirmed: 26 percent say he should be confirmed, while 8 percent say he should not be; 63 percent didn't render an opinion.

Mr. Bush selected Roberts to succeed the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist as chief justice. The conservative judge could, at age 50, shape the high court for at least a generation.

The vote to confirm him "isn't just rolling the dice it's betting the whole house," Schumer said.

"I don't know what I'm going to do," said Feinstein, who said his testimony showed "this very cautious, very precise man, young, obviously with staying power. ... I'm convinced you will be there, God willing, for 40 years. And that even concerns me more because it means that my vote means more."

Feinstein voted to confirm Roberts for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; Schumer voted against him.

Frustrated Democrats tried to elicit a sense of John Roberts the man rather than the judge who was a political appointee in the Reagan and first Bush administrations and a multimillion-dollar lawyer in private practice

Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., who participated in the civil rights struggles that helped secure passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, remained unconvinced of Roberts' record.

"I don't buy this argument he was just doing his job, just following the rule," said Lewis, one of more than a dozen witnesses who testified after Roberts.

Schumer questioned whether Roberts would be "a truly modest, temperate, careful judge," one "who will impede congressional prerogatives but does not use the bench to remake society," or, as some Democrats fear, one who "will use your enormous talents to use the court to turn back a near century of progress."

Democrats have complained that Roberts avoided many of their questions by saying he couldn't comment on issues that could come before the Supreme Court.

Early on in his third — and abbreviated — day of testimony, Roberts said Congress has the authority to pass laws barring discrimination based on race, gender and disability, and he defended his record on minority issues.

He said he had argued cases in favor of and against affirmative action and noted that he had participated in a program to assist minority students considering law school.

"Yes, I was in an administration that was opposed to quotas," Roberts told Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. "Opposition to quotas is not the same thing as opposition to affirmative action."

Several Democrats have criticized Roberts for assailing the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling in Plyler v. Doe, which struck down a Texas law and said the state had to provide free public education to illegal immigrant children.

Roberts, then with the Reagan administration, criticized the ruling and argued the administration should have gotten involved in the case.

Feinstein asked if Roberts, as a person, believed illegal immigrant children should be educated. Roberts offered legal responses, before saying, "My own view, every child should be educated."

As chief justice, Roberts would assign the writing of opinions in which he was with the majority. He could keep the best cases for himself, or dole them out to other justices.

Rehnquist's predecessor, Warren Burger has been accused of being manipulative in the assigning of opinions, even joining the majority, though he disagreed, so he could assign the opinion to himself and try to limit the outcome.

Roberts rejected the idea of assigning himself cases as a strategic move.