Clinton Calls Ginsburg ‘Clearly Pro-Choice’ : Law: President says he finds no problems with his Supreme Court nominee’s writings on abortion issue. Biden sees hearings starting in late July.

President Clinton called Supreme Court nominee Ruth Bader Ginsburg “clearly pro-choice” on the abortion issue Tuesday and predicted that she would have a quick and easy confirmation in the Senate.

“I’m confident she will be ready to assume her position on the Supreme Court when the fall term begins in October,” he said.

In recent weeks, senators and their staffs have been grumbling that Clinton had taken so long to choose a nominee that they could not conduct hearings and vote on the confirmation before the high court resumes its work.

But on Tuesday, the sentiment on Capitol Hill had changed, as the President won broad praise for choosing the cautious, highly competent federal judge.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) said that it is now quite possible that the panel will conduct its hearings in late July, as had been planned earlier.

“I have never been as optimistic nor have I have been as pleased by the naming of a nominee as I am by the choice President Clinton has made,” said Biden. “I have every expectation that Judge Ginsburg will be met with wide approval by liberals, conservatives, moderates and the Senate as a whole.”

Several Republicans echoed that view and said that Ginsburg is the kind of judge they would gladly support.

On Monday, Kate Michelman, executive director of the National Abortion Rights Action League, had raised questions about Ginsburg’s views on the abortion right, since she had criticized the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling for going too far too fast.

But Clinton sought to put that criticism to rest in his press conference, noting that he had read Ginsburg’s writings on the subject and was untroubled by them.

Two weeks ago, the President admitted ruefully as he withdrew the nomination that he had not read in advance the writings of University of Pennsylvania law professor C. Lani Guinier, whom he had named to head the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

Ginsburg had argued in a lecture delivered in March that the Supreme Court should have moved gradually in the 1970s to strike down abortion laws and should have based its decision on equality for women, rather than a “right to privacy.”

“I thought it was a very provocative and impressive argument,” Clinton said, adding: “I’m not sure I agree with her.

“I think if you read the lecture, she is clearly pro-choice in the sense that she believes the government should not make that decision for the women of America,” he added. “There is no suggestion in any of her writings that she’s not pro-choice.”

Indeed, some conservative legal activists attacked Ginsburg for taking an “extreme” abortion rights stand that would require government funding for the procedure.

In a pair of 6-3 decisions in 1977 and 1980, the high court ruled that neither the states nor the federal government need pay for abortions for poor women. In a subsequent article, Ginsburg called this a “stunning curtailment” of the abortion right and said that it would mean “poor and unsophisticated women will find access to abortion at best difficult, too often impossible.”

Thomas L. Jipping, an attorney for the conservative activist group Coalitions for America, said it “is being misreported that she is a moderate. She thinks the states should be required to fund abortions and that’s an extreme position.”

Gary L. Bauer, a former aide to former President Ronald Reagan and president of the Family Research Council, agreed and said he doubts that most Americans would support her view on abortion funding. “Even in a pro-choice society, most people don’t support public funding for abortion,” Bauer maintained.

Both Bauer and Jipping said that their organizations still are studying Ginsburg’s writings and have not decided to mount a campaign against her.

Meanwhile, leaders of the conservative Institute for Justice, which played a key role in defeating Guinier’s nomination, voiced their support for Ginsburg.

“She takes each case on its merits and is not driven by results,” said Chip Mellor, the institute’s president and general counsel. “From what we can see today, she’s an experienced, well-qualified judge with a moderate record, and we couldn’t expect much more than that.”