The nomination of Appeals Court Judge Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court has been marked by charge and countercharge. Last month, the White House distributed its briefing paper on the Bork nomination, and yesterday the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), released a report by committee consultants who were asked to respond to the administration paper. Following are excerpts from those reports.

Judge Robert Bork, nominee for associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, has been a practicing attorney, a professor of law, the solicitor general of the United States, and a federal appellate judge. He is among the most eloquent and principled proponents of judicial restraint. This philosophy of the law holds that judges must faithfully interpret the Constitution and statutes. Judges must give full effect to values that may be fairly discovered in the text, language, and history of the Constitution and apply them to modern conditions as a check against government action . . . .

Judge Bork's legal philosophy follows directly in the mainstream tradition exemplified by jurists such as Frankfurter, Harlan and Black rather than the "activist" trend which resulted in the invalidation of major New Deal legislation in the 1930s and has recently reemerged in some quarters . . . . Judge Bork has never wavered in his consistent and principled protection of civil rights, civil liberties and other values that can actually be derived from the Constitution and federal law . . . . Civil Rights

During his term as solicitor general . . . Judge Bork was responsible for the government arguing some of the most far-reaching civil rights cases in the nation's history. For example, in the area of voting rights, Judge Bork argued successfully before the Supreme Court in landmark cases, occasionally arguing for even more expansive interpretations of the law than handed down by the court . . . .

Since being elevated to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Bork has participated in a number of important opinions upholding the rights of minorities. In the extended voting rights litigation in Sumter County v. United States, he joined an opinion refusing to allow a county to implement an at-large election system because the county failed to show that the voting system had "neither the purpose nor effect of denying or abridging the right of black South Carolinians to vote" . . . .

Judge Bork has joined in several far-reaching decisions that expand the force of laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex. He agreed, for example, that the Foreign Service was subject to the Equal Pay Act, and reversed a district court that had adopted the contrary view . . . .

It has been suggested that Judge Bork may be less sympathetic to affirmative action than was {retired} Justice {Lewis F.} Powell. This assumption is based on Bork's criticism, while a law professor, of Justice Powell's opinion in the Bakke case, which authorized racially preferential treatment in certain circumstances. (Judge Bork has not had occasion to issue any rulings in affirmative action cases while a federal judge.) Thus, any claim that Judge Bork is less sympathetic to "civil rights" than Justice Powell can logically refer -- at most -- solely to this one issue and rests wholly upon comments made several years ago . . . .

Bork has always emphasized his "abhorrence of racial discrimination . . . . "Social Issues

When he was in academic life, Judge Bork criticized the Supreme Court's right-to-privacy decisions as not sufficiently grounded in the Constitution. He has, nevertheless, opposed what he views as impermissible attempts to overturn these decisions . . . .

{Regarding abortion} Judge Bork has never stated whether he would vote to overrule Roe v. Wade . . . . {He} has in the past questioned only whether there is a right to abortion in the Constitution . . . . The Bork Record

Judge Bork is an open-minded judge who is well within the mainstream of contemporary jurisprudence . . . . Statistics prove that Judge Bork voted with the majority in over 94 percent of those cases.

Judge Bork's record on appeal is impeccable. The Supreme Court has never reversed any of the majority opinions written by Judge Bork, which total over 100. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never reversed any of the over 400 majority opinions in which Judge Bork has joined in one way or another . . . . First Amendment

During his five years on the bench, Judge Bork has been one of the judiciary's most vigorous defenders of First Amendment values . . . . In Ollman v. Evans and Novak, Judge Bork greatly expanded the constitutional protections courts had been according journalists facing libel suits for political commentary . . . .

In a letter published in the ABA Journal in 1984, {Bork wrote}, "I do not think . . . that First Amendment protection should apply only to speech that is explicitly political . . . . I have long since concluded that many other forms of discourse, such as moral and scientific debate, are central to democratic government and deserve protection . . . . "