Judicial Remarks Stir Conservatives

Outraged conservatives demanded Thursday that Sen. Arlen Specter not be allowed to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee after he made comments they said suggested that a Supreme Court nominee who opposed abortion rights could not be confirmed.

Specter, a moderate Republican from Pennsylvania, is in line by seniority to head the committee, which conducts hearings on nominees to the court.

The Family Research Council, a group that opposes abortion, called remarks that Specter made during a Philadelphia news conference Wednesday the “height of arrogance and ingratitude.”

Noting that President Bush had helped Specter win a tough primary battle against an antiabortion candidate, the group urged supporters to call or write Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) to demand that he not allow Specter to become chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Before Specter could become chairman he would need the approval of other Republicans in the Senate.

Bush endorsed Specter in the primary and made a tide-turning appearance on his behalf.

“Our pro-life president and his colleagues in the Senate must not allow Sen. Specter to determine the makeup of our courts. Sen. Specter should not become the next Judiciary Committee chairman,” the group said.

In a statement issued Thursday, Specter denied that he had warned Bush away from nominees opposed to abortion.

“Contrary to press accounts, I did not warn the president about anything and was very respectful of his constitutional authority on the appointment of federal judges,” Specter said.

“I have never and would never apply any litmus test on the abortion issue and, as the record shows, I have voted to confirm Chief Justice [William H.] Rehnquist, Justice [Sandra Day] O’Connor and Justice [Clarence] Thomas” -- all conservative justices.

According to a transcript provided by Specter’s office of the Wednesday news conference, a reporter asked the senator what he would do if Bush “wants anti-abortion judges” on the court.

“When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely,” Specter replied.

Roe vs. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that affirmed a woman’s right to choose abortion under the constitutional right to privacy.

Specter, who supports abortion rights, reminded reporters at the news conference that he had called the Roe decision “inviolate.”

The 74-year-old senator said that although he did not want “to prejudge what the president is going to do, the president is well aware of what happened when a number of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster.”

“The president has said he is not going to impose a litmus test,” Specter said, “and I would expect the president to be mindful of the consideration that I mentioned.”

With Bush expected to have the opportunity to name several Supreme Court justices over the next four years, the nomination process is likely to be one of the most emotional aspects of his second term.

In his remarks Wednesday, the blunt-spoken Specter also said he hoped that whomever Bush nominated, it would be a person of stature, on the level of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis or John Marshall.

“With all due respect to the U.S. Supreme Court, we don’t have one” of that caliber now, he said. “I think we could use ... a Holmes or a Brandeis.”

Specter’s office said it had no transcript of other remarks, reported in the Philadelphia Inquirer, warning Bush against political hubris at a time when most Republicans are celebrating the president’s victory by saying it has given him a mandate to make bold reforms on Social Security and taxes.

“If you have a race that is won by a percent or two, you have a narrowly divided country, and that’s not a traditional mandate,” Specter reportedly said. “President Bush will have that very much in mind.”