But Rehnquist Battle Could Affect Its Public Image : Fight Unlikely to Alter Workings of Court

The long, bitter battle over William H. Rehnquist’s confirmation as chief justice will not have an apparent or lasting impact on workings of the Supreme Court, legal scholars said Thursday.

Once confirmed, whether by a vote of 100 to 0 or 51 to 49, the chief justice has a lifetime appointment, and he and the court are largely immune from public pressure. However, if the partisan fighting does not affect the court’s internal operation, it may threaten the court’s special standing in the public’s eye.

The court’s authority, the scholars note, rests with its unique role of interpreting the law, not making political decisions. Yet, in recent months, both Republicans and Democrats have stressed the political biases of the justices.

Six Weeks of Attacks

After six weeks of attacks led by liberal Democrats, Rehnquist was confirmed Wednesday night on a largely party-line vote, 65 to 33. Only two Republicans rejected President Reagan’s nominee, but 31 of 47 Democrats opposed him.

“Over the course of these events, I think the court may appear to the public as a far more political body, and I worry about that,” Harvard University law professor Archibald Cox said.

“Rehnquist begins his job under a more highly polarized situation. The public view of him is more sharply etched,” University of Virginia law professor A. E. Dick Howard said. “I think the Rehnquist court will be seen as a more ideological court.”

“Within the court, I’d be very surprised if these controversies have much effect,” Howard added. “They know Rehnquist, and he’s universally spoken well of within the court.”

Rulings Prompt Responses

The public judgment of the court, they said, will depend on the tenor of the court’s rulings. The controversy may heighten if the court’s decisions become predictably or harshly conservative, just as “Impeach Earl Warren” signs went up in some parts of the country after a series of startlingly liberal rulings.

However, in the early 1970s, the Warren E. Burger court, which had been expected to take a sharp right turn, defused controversy with rulings that appeared to sway from left to right. Three months ago, for example, the Burger court outraged liberals by upholding a Georgia law forbidding private homosexual activity. The next day, the court outraged conservatives by upholding two affirmative action plans.

On Thursday morning, Rehnquist walked down the marble steps of the court for a brief press conference in which he said he was “gratified” by the Senate vote and was “glad the confirmation process has finally run its course.”

Rehnquist said he and newly confirmed Associate Justice Antonin Scalia will be sworn in on Sept. 26. The court opens its fall term on Oct. 6.

Looks to Future

The 33 “no” votes in the Senate were the most ever cast against a confirmed justice, but Rehnquist refused to comment on criticism voiced against him.

“I’m looking forward to the future and trying to be a good chief justice. I’m not going to address myself to the past,” Rehnquist said.

Most veteran court observers agreed that the attacks on Rehnquist’s record and the closer-than-expected vote in the Senate will not diminish his authority.

‘Public Memory Is Short’

“It means nothing,” University of Chicago law professor Philip Kurland said of the large negative vote in the Senate. “The public memory is short. The only parallel that comes to mind is the (Charles Evans) Hughes nomination. He was approved after a battle of some proportion. But, after he took office, it totally disappeared from sight.”

In 1930, President Herbert Hoover nominated Hughes, then a corporate attorney, to be chief justice. Although he had been an associate justice and a 1916 presidential candidate, he was attacked during the Depression era as a symbol of corporate influence. After a bitter fight, he was confirmed on a 52-26 vote and went on to become, by most estimates, one of the greatest of Supreme Court justices.