WASHINGTON (ABP) — Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, in his first day of questioning before a Senate panel, danced delicately around questions about how he would rule on abortion but also said he wouldn't let his personal faith and or the Bible influence how he interprets the law.
Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee Sept. 13, President Bush's nominee to become the 17th chief justice of the United States said he would not let his Catholic faith or moral code interfere with fair adjudication of cases that come before the high court.
But he also refused to tip his hand about whether he would consider overturning Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
The committee's Republican chairman, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, began the hearing by launching directly into the abortion debate, asking Roberts if he agreed with the legal framework behind the Roe decision. “Do you see any erosion of precedent as to Roe?” Specter, the only Republican member of the panel who supports abortion rights, asked.
“I think I should stay away from discussion of particular issues that are likely to come before the court again,” Roberts said, in a formulation that would be echoed throughout the day. “In the area of abortion, there are other cases on the court's docket, of course.”
Roberts — like previous Supreme Court nominees — repeatedly refused to answer questions in a way that would hint how he would rule on certain issues in the future.
He expressed support for the legal principle of stare decisis — Latin for “let the decision stand” — that says Supreme Court precedents on issues should generally be upheld.
During his 2002 confirmation hearings for his current position as a judge on the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, Roberts acknowledged that Roe was “settled law.” However, his opponents have noted that, as a Supreme Court justice, Roberts would have much more leeway to overturn one of his own court's precedents.
In response to Specter's question about a 1992 Supreme Court decision that upheld the thrust of Roe, Roberts said deference to precedent is important for the high court — but also dependent on many factors.
“I do think that it is a jolt to the legal system when you overrule a precedent. Precedent takes an important role,” he said. “It is not enough that you think a previous decision was wrongly decided [to overrule it].”
In a later exchange on abortion cases with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Roberts said that “settled expectations” — “people expect that the law is going to be what the court has told them the law was going to be” — are a factor in determining whether it is wise to overturn a precedent.
Roberts also expressed support for some of the legal underpinnings of the Roe decision. Specifically, he said he supports the right to privacy about contraceptive decisions — an opinion many religious conservatives find suspect. “I do believe the right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways,” he said.
Specifically, he said he supports the court's reasoning in the 1965 Griswold vs. Connecticut decision that said states cannot ban contraception because doing so would interfere with the privacy rights of married couples. In deciding Roe eight years later, the court relied heavily on Griswold's finding of such privacy rights.
Roberts also discussed his Catholic faith and how it might affect his rulings on issues for which the Roman Catholic Church has clear teachings — such as abortion and end-of-life issues.
Roberts was asked twice about John F. Kennedy's famous 1960 presidential campaign speech to a group of Protestant ministers in Houston. Addressing his then-controversial Catholic faith, Kennedy said, “I do not speak for my church on public maters, and the church does not speak for me.”
In response to a question from Specter, Roberts said he agreed with Kennedy's formulation, and added that there is there is “nothing in my personal views, based on faith or other sources, that would keep me from upholding” Roe vs. Wade.
Later, in responding to a similar question from Feinstein, Roberts said, “My faith and my religious beliefs do not play a role in judging. When it comes to judging, I look to the law books and always have. I do not look to the Bible or any other religious source.”
However, he also declined to support Kennedy's statements in the same 1960 speech supporting an “absolute separation” between church and state.
“I don't know what you mean by 'absolute separation of church and state,'” Roberts told Feinstein, noting that while he supports both religion clauses of the First Amendment, the definition of “separation of church and state” is still unsettled as a matter of constitutional law.
Roberts will likely face at least two more days of hearings before the committee votes on whether to send his nomination to the full Senate. The committee is made up of 10 Republicans and eight Democrats.