A Rare Sight in Washington: Partisans Back Off

[Click here for specific arguments]

Independentcourt.org, a consortium of liberal groups opposing the Roberts nomination, accused the nominee of misleading the Senate about his positions on a range of issues.

"Yesterday's simple platitudes by John Roberts have turned to today's tortured responses to Senators' questions. Several times throughout this morning's hearing, Roberts gave misleading answers to questions about his positions in four areas: the right to privacy, civil rights (Grove City), gender discrimination and voting rights. Time and again, he gave the excuse that he was merely expressing 'administration positions,' when his memos show they were clearly his own views."

Some in the left are calling Roberts a "media darling" and suggesting journalists have focused on irrelevant issues, such as his charm and preparation, rather than substantive ones, such as his record and ideological leanings.

The liberal American Progress Action Fund, in its http://www.thinkprogress.org/ blog, accused Roberts of gross inconsistency in determining which questions he would answer.

"In his testimony, Roberts explained he only won't talk about cases that are 'live with business.' When is something 'live with business'? When John Roberts says it is." As Sen. Arlen Specter noted there have been 38 cases in which Roe has been taken up and had its core holding upheld. Roberts still considers that case 'live' and off-limits. There is no principle. Roberts talks about cases when it is politically convenient. When it isn't he clams up."

Groups on the right have felt little need to do the sort of aggressive flacking that typically accompanies high-profile battles in Washington these days.

"As the nation's largest public policy women's organization, we recognize that basic rights and liberties are only secure when guaranteed to all people equally and judges are blind to what 'class' people belong," said Wendy Wright, executive vice president of the conservative Concerned Women for America. "John Roberts has exhibited this ability to apply the law fairly, with respect for the fundamental liberties we all deserve."

Wendy Long, counsel to the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, said in a statement: "Judge Roberts has continued in his second day of questioning to display his faithfulness to the Constitution and to the judicial self-restraint that the Framers of the Constitution relied on judges to exercise so that our system of government could work. He testified that the Constitution contains terms and principles that apply to new conditions of today -- but not that those terms and principles can be ignored or effectively rewritten by the courts. He refused to concur, for example, with Senator Specter's assertion that abortion is a form of liberty protected by the due process clause."

Tomorrow, the Committee for Justice, a conservative group set up at the behest of Karl Rove and Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) to advocate on behalf of President Bush's judicial nominees, will hold a press conference on Capitol Hill "featuring victims of judicial activism by the Supreme Court and other federal courts, in order to convey the importance of constitutionalist judges."