Roberts Dodges, But Keeps His Cool

Supreme Court nominee John Roberts jousted with Democratic senators Tuesday at his confirmation hearing to be chief justice, dodging their attempts to pin down his opinions on abortion, voting rights and other legal issues.

Roberts said he felt the landmark 1973 ruling legalizing abortion was "settled as a precedent" and that the Constitution provides a right to privacy.

But when senators pressed for details on his opinions — even to the point of interrupting his answers — Roberts said repeatedly that he shouldn't address some issues that could come before the Supreme Court with him as chief justice.

CBS News legal analyst Jan Crawford Greenberg of the Chicago Tribune said that Roberts' statement does not mean he supports abortion rights.

"There was a comma after that sentence. He said it was settled law, subject to the legal principle that allows courts to rethink their decisions if there are compelling reasons to do so," Greenburg said. "He did not say he would not overturn Roe, despite question after question from senator after senator, trying to pin him down on those views."

CBS News Correspondent Gloria Borger reports that one of the only views Roberts was willing to offer was that of the clear division between Congress and the courts.

"Millions and millions of people have voted for you and not one has voted for us," Roberts said.

At one point, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who has indicated he may run for president in 2008, accused Roberts of "filibustering."

"Go ahead and continue not to answer," said Biden. Later, he interrupted Roberts and when criticized, insisted, "His answers are misleading, with all due respect."

"Wait a minute! Wait a minute! They may be misleading but they are his answers," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the Judiciary Committee chairman.

Roberts — who had noted that Biden earlier would have heard a whole answer if he hadn't interrupted — kept his cool.

"With respect, they are my answers and with respect, they are not misleading," he said.

Senators questioned President Bush's choice to succeed the late William H. Rehnquist on abortion, privacy, voting rights and the balance of power between the branches of government. Roberts frequently answered through the prism of legal precedent but declined to address specifics.

The heart of the abortion ruling is "settled as a precedent of the court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis," the concept that long-established rulings should be given extra weight, Roberts said.

Still, review and revisions have been the hallmark of the high court on issues from integration to gay rights, and Roberts indicated that groundbreaking cases can draw a second look.

"If particular precedents have proven to be unworkable, they don't lead to predictable results, they're difficult to apply, that's one factor supporting reconsideration," Roberts said.

If confirmed, the 50-year-old Roberts would be the youngest chief justice in 200 years, with the power to shape the high court for decades. Democrats and Republicans see no major obstacles to his winning Senate approval and joining the other justices when the new term begins Oct. 3.

Greenberg said that in Tuesday's hearings, Roberts did not waver.

"He's a man who is prepared," Greenberg said. "We saw his humor, we didn't really see him go off his points that he's made before."

Mr. Bush originally nominated Roberts to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the court's crucial swing vote who announced her plans to retire in July. Within days of Rehnquist's death on Sept. 3, Mr. Bush tapped Roberts to be chief justice.

Democrats pressed the appellate judge about his writings on civil rights while a young lawyer in the Reagan administration two decades ago. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., described some of those writings on voting rights as a "narrow, cramped and mean-spirited view" that failed to show a full appreciation of discrimination.

Borger reports that the inquiry concerned a memo written by Roberts 23 years ago when he served in the Reagan administration. In it, he argued for tightening the reach of the voting rights act.

"It was the position of the Reagan administration for whom I worked," he said.

Under questioning from Kennedy, Roberts said that he had no problem with the 1965 Voting Rights Act. "The constitutionality has been upheld, and I don't have any issue with that."

That failed to assuage Kennedy, who spoke critically and at length about Roberts' writings. Kennedy was interrupted several times by Specter, who told him to let Roberts speak.

The nominee dismissed any suggestion that his Catholic faith would influence his decisions if he were confirmed, bringing the number of Catholics on the court to a historic high of four. The Roman Catholic Church strongly opposes abortion.

"There's nothing in my personal views based on faith or other sources that would prevent me from applying the precedent of the court faithfully under the principles of stare decisis," Roberts said.

Stare decisis is Latin for "to stand by a decision" and legally translates into the doctrine that says courts are bound by previous decisions, or precedents, particularly when a case has been decided by a higher court.

Questioned about rights of privacy, the appellate judge cited several amendments in the Bill of Rights and said, "The court has explained that the liberty protected is not limited to freedom from physical restraint."

CBS News Senior Political Editor Dotty Lynch reports Roberts' answers on Roe v. Wade confused partisans on both sides of the abortion issue. The conservative Web site Confirmthem.com reflected some concern on the right.

From Dave: "I got to say, Roberts' defense of the right to privacy was too strong for my liking. He essentially endorsed a general right to privacy, and there was no need for him to do so."

However, Marshall chimes in: "Roberts' answer was brilliant. He made a statement that will satisfy most Americans about privacy while leaving himself enough wiggle room to move the Court on that issue in the future."

Reid Cox, the general counsel of Center for Individual Freedom e-mailed: "Note that Judge Roberts did a masterful job in explaining that the doctrine of stare decisis (or following precedent) is not some sacred cow that must be adhered to 100 percent of the time."

A conservative source who represents a number of anti-abortion groups told CBS News that there is no worry yet among his colleagues that Roberts will be "another Souter," who was thought to be a conservative but has often voted with the moderates on the court. "Everyone likes him," he said. "It's the liberals who will be nervous."

But liberals were also of mixed minds. On the liberal Daily Kos, Armando wrote: "Judge Roberts, in a surprise to me, was surprisingly forthcoming and detailed in his answers. In particular, in answering whether he believed the Constitution recognized a right to privacy, Roberts stated expressly and unequivocally that he accepted and agreed, without reservation, that the Constitution does recognize a right to privacy."

Liberal activists were not so sanguine. They continued to accuse Roberts of avoiding specifics. Ralph Neas, president of People for the American Way, characterized Roberts as "playing dodge ball."

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said "John Roberts failed to state whether he believes the right to privacy includes a woman's right to choose as recognized in Roe v. Wade."

On other issues: