Lawmakers’ Reaction to Bush Choice Favorable but Cautious : Senate: Few know much about Souter’s record. However, many see Rudman’s enthusiastic endorsement as a plus.

Although few senators had ever heard of David H. Souter before Monday, early signs were favorable that his nomination to the Supreme Court would be approved by the Senate.

A big plus for him is the strong backing of widely respected Sen. Warren B. Rudman (R-N.H.), who helped bring Souter to President Bush’s attention and lavished praise on his longtime friend throughout the Capitol.

“To know him is to be enormously impressed,” Rudman told reporters in the Senate radio-TV studio shortly after Bush’s announcement.

Rudman said senators will find Souter to be “a classic conservative intellectual. . . . He cannot be characterized as an ideologue in any way, shape or form.”

“I would be very surprised if there would be serious opposition,” Rudman said. “There is no chink in his personal life. He does not belong to any organization that I know of. He works too hard.”

Overhearing Rudman’s remarks, Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum (D-Ohio)--a liberal who would be likely to lead any attack against a conservative nominee--stepped to the microphones and said: “This senator has heard nothing negative. I have certainly heard he has a very strong, positive record.”

Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), a moderate who has been a swing vote on previous Supreme Court nominations, said that Souter “appears to be very, very capable” and probably is headed for confirmation.

Influential conservative Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) also said he liked Souter’s credentials and, like Metzenbaum, was impressed with Rudman’s glowing endorsement.

“I have confidence that the President made an excellent choice,” he said.

Nevertheless, Hatch and others said they knew very little about Souter’s record and views, especially on pressing issues such as abortion. Several Democrats and Republicans said they expected the Senate Judiciary Committee to be more penetrating than it has been in the past in seeking to determine the views of court nominees.

“This is a pivotal appointment,” said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). “I don’t think there have been many times since the New Deal that the President has had an opportunity to shape the Supreme Court like he has now.”

A member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Leahy said: “I would hope we would not have a rush of members of the U.S. Senate saying they would vote for or against Judge Souter. . . . We should have the hearings, hear those for or against him and vote the issue up or down.”

Still, Leahy said questions likely would be phrased to include abortion rights as a topic.

“I think it would be naive to think that Roe vs. Wade in one form or another is not going to be part of a lot of questions, interestingly enough, with the desire to know about that coming from both sides of the issue.

“There will be a lot more known about him, I guarantee you that.”

Groups on both sides of the controversial abortion issue expressed trepidation about the lack of knowledge they have of Souter’s views on the subject. Several abortion rights leaders demanded that senators press him hard at confirmation hearings.

“It would be a terrible injustice to confirm any nominee without knowing he is committed to protecting fundamental civil rights, including the right to choose” an abortion, said Kate Michelman, head of the National Abortion Rights Action League. “A nominee cannot be allowed to duck this issue.”

Joseph M. Scheidler, head of the Pro-Life Action League, said that “we’re trying to find out stuff about” Souter. “We’ve been calling people all over. I don’t even have enough suspicion to be nervous. I’m kind of in shock.”

However, at least one conservative group knew enough to be pleased. “President Bush has taken the first step in repairing the split between himself and the conservatives, his most important constituency,” said Richard A. Viguerie, chairman of United Conservatives of America.

In a statement made without elaborating, Viguerie said: “This Supreme Court appointment leaves conservatives with smiles on their faces. President Bush recognized that he had a problem with conservatives, and he did something about it. Conservatives have given thumbs up.”

Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.) served notice that the Senate will take a close look, but promised “a prompt and fair process.” He called Souter “a respected member of the U.S. Court of Appeals” and noted that his prior service as New Hampshire’s attorney general and as a member of that state’s Supreme Court “provides valuable legal experience.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) reserved comment until today. But several committee members said they expected that hearings on the nomination would begin as soon as Congress returns from its August recess shortly after Labor Day.

“I don’t know of any senator who wants to delay the nominee for the sake of delay,” Leahy said.

Like nearly every other member of the Judiciary Committee, Hatch had no recollection of Souter passing through the committee en route to being approved for the appeals court last spring. But in the clubby atmosphere of the Senate, what could count most in Souter’s favor is Rudman’s personal endorsement.

“I don’t think people have a great deal of knowledge about Souter,” Hatch said. “I have a great deal of confidence in Sen. Rudman. He talked about his academic credentials and said he was a good person and a good lawyer. I was impressed with what he said.”

Hatch earlier had dismissed speculation that he himself might be tapped by Bush, saying: “I irritate a lot of people in the Administration.” He said then that he thought that Bush might pick a woman. But after the announcement, Hatch said he suspected that Bush would choose someone who did not have a record that could be attacked.

The Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, Strom Thurmond from South Carolina, expressed disappointment that the nominee was not from the South.

“He was not my choice,” Thurmond said. “There is nobody on the court from the South. The South constitutes one quarter of the nation and ought to have at least one justice.”

Several liberal Democrats said they would seek Souter’s views on abortion, civil rights and First Amendment issues.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said: “The Judiciary Committee and the full Senate have a responsibility to determine whether he possesses a strong commitment to the fundamental values of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that . . . will profoundly affect the lives and rights of all Americans.”

Staff writer Marlene Cimons contributed to this story.