Note:  NOW-NJ president Suzannah Porter is quoted in this article.

State powers begin taking sides

By KAREN AYRES, Trenton Times, July 21, 2005

Let the battle begin.

Liberals and conservatives jumped into action in New Jersey yesterday to respond to President Bush's nomination of conservative Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the U.S. Supreme Court.

An alliance of state women's organizations immediately planned a rally at the State House today to protest the selection of the federal appeals court judge.

Those groups contend Roberts' beliefs are out of step with most New Jerseyans and, in particular, pose a serious threat to a woman's right to choose an abortion established in 1973 under the Roe v. Wade court decision.

"I don't know that Bush could have come up with a more conservative choice regarding privacy and personal freedom," said Laurie Lowenstein, executive director of the N.J. National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

Conservatives argued that Roberts' judicial record and credentials make him a strong nominee who will fairly interpret the Constitution.

"We are not looking for someone who will simply award victories," said Robert George, a Princeton University professor who is also on the conservative Family Research Council.  "We are looking for someone to interpret the Constitution properly and let the democratic process work."

Following the president's announcement Tuesday night, the main issue under debate over the nomination here in New Jersey and elsewhere across the country is abortion.

In 1991, Roberts, as principal deputy solicitor general for the first Bush administration, co-wrote a Supreme Court brief that stated:  "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled."

During a Senate confirmation hearing in 2003 for his federal appeals court position, Roberts said he filed that brief as an advocate for his client and didn't hold any views that would prevent him from upholding the Roe decision.

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land," he said.

-- -- --

Suzannah Porter, president of the National Organization for Women of New Jersey, said yesterday she doesn't trust Roberts' support of the Roe decision, noting he didn't have nearly as much power to shape laws on the appeals court.

"He is political payback for the right wing and their support (of Bush) in the last election," Porter said.  "We don't feel the majority of this country has given consent to a mandate to appoint to the highest court someone who represents the minority of extreme right-wing values."

Tom Wilson, chairman of the state Republican Party, said Roberts, a Harvard graduate, possesses the right kind of philosophy for the court.

"His record clearly demonstrates that he shares the values of and priorities of the working families of New Jersey," Wilson said, "and that he will strictly interpret the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench."

George, a director of the Family Research Council, said he was pleased to see the president choose someone who understands his job is to interpret the Constitution rather than make laws.

"The pro-life and pro-family movement has never demanded anything more but is unwilling to accept anything else than a constitutionalist judge," George said.

The Princeton University professor said he also was happy that Bush reportedly didn't ask Roberts specific questions about hot issues.

"The question is not what Judge Robert's opinion is on abortion or marriage or any specific issue, it is whether he is a constitutionalist," George said.

But many people contend that questions about such important issues must be asked during the Senate confirmation process, which likely will start around Labor Day, to determine whether Roberts is a good choice for the court.

Phyllis Kinsler, president of the Central Jersey chapter of Planned Parenthood, said yesterday it's hard to prejudge Roberts because he has only spent two years in the federal courts and has a short record.

Kinsler said the public deserves to know how he would approach issues such as abortion on the high court, citing several impending cases that have to do with reproductive rights.

"I don't know enough about how he will answer those questions to approve or disapprove," Kinsler said.  "What we're most concerned about is not having this look like a done-deal, but rather a deliberative process."

-- -- --

Marie Tasy of New Jersey Right to Life also said she needs to do more research to form an opinion on Robert's record.

As for the opposition from pro-choice groups, Tasy said she wasn't surprised by it.  "They would oppose anyone whom President Bush nominated," she said.

U.S. Sen. Jon Corzine, D-N.J., who is running for governor, said yesterday the Senate must conduct a thorough and rigorous evaluation of Roberts.

Though Corzine said he was disappointed a woman wasn't selected to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, he said he looked forward to learning more about Roberts.

"We have a duty to the American people to confirm a justice who will uphold our basic values and continue the legacy of Justice O'Connor, who was a voice of moderation, reason and consistency on the Supreme Court," Corzine said.

The organizers of today's rally said they hoped it would show solidarity behind Corzine and U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., who have expressed support for a pro-choice nominee in the past.

"I believe that if (Roberts) can be revealed for the extremist that he is, the U.S. Senate is not going to want to approve him," said Lowenstein of the N.J. National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

The groups vowed to continue to lobby the senators, who both are among the Democratic minority in the Senate, in hopes of making their viewpoints heard.

"They are in the minority," Porter said, "and they're going to need a lot of support to hold the line."

The rally is scheduled today from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. on the State House steps.

NOTE:  Contact Karen Ayres at kayres@njtimes.com or at (609) 943-5727.