WASHINGTON, D.C. — Senators completed 20 hours of contentious questioning of John Roberts Jr. Thursday with many Democrats expressing concerns that the chief justice nominee might use his "brilliant" legal intellect to turn the nation's highest court into a champion of conservative policy.

"You may very well possess the most powerful intellect of any person to come before the Senate for this position," said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who noted that Roberts spent three days answering tough questions "without any paper in front of you at all, without a single aide whispering a word in your ear or passing you a note."

"Will you use your enormous talents ... to turn back a near century of progress and create the majority that Justices [Antonin] Scalia and [Clarence] Thomas could not achieve?" Schumer asked, adding that he had hoped to determine "the fullness of your heart — the ability to truly empathize with those less fortunate."

Roberts said his refusal to discuss his personal views was not due to a lack of empathy.

Story continues

advertisement

"Judges never lose sight or should never lose sight of the fact that their decisions affect real people with real lives, and I appreciate that," he said.

He also asked the senators to look at his 50 opinions as a circuit court judge for the past two and a half years.

"That should convince you that I'm not an ideologue," Roberts said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) questioned whether a nominee's heart should ever be a factor.

"There are all kinds of hearts: bleeding hearts, hard hearts," Graham said, noting that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who worked for the American Civil Liberties Union and held liberal views about abortion, was confirmed by a vote of 96-3 in the Senate despite being what most Republicans would call "a bleeding heart."

"She has a different value system than I do. But that doesn't mean she doesn't have a good heart. And I want this committee to understand that if we go down this road of putting people's hearts in play, and the only way you can have a good heart is, 'Adopt my value system,' we're doing a great disservice to the judiciary," Graham said.

When asked if he would be there for "the little guy," Roberts told senators that his allegiance was to the Constitution.

"If the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy's going to win in court before me. But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy's going to win, because my obligation is to the Constitution," Roberts said. "That's the oath."

He also attempted to clarify his views on the distinctions between affirmative action and racial quotas.

"Do you think having a diverse society where everyone has an equal chance to participate is an American value and is fundamental to the strength of our society?" Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) asked Roberts.

"I do. I agree with that statement, senator. Yes," Roberts said, adding that he argued before the Supreme Court in Rice v. Cayetano for affirmative action for native Hawaiians, and is active in civic programs that aid minorities and the disadvantaged.

But Kennedy confronted Roberts with his work in the Department of Justice during the Reagan administration, when he appeared to have what Kennedy saw as "a pattern" of opposing affirmative action programs.

"Yes, I was in an administration that was opposed to quotas," Roberts said. "Opposition to quotas is not the same thing as opposition to affirmative action. That was something that President Reagan emphasized repeatedly."

The Committee will vote on Roberts' confirmation Sept. 22, with a final vote by the full Senate expected before the Supreme Court begins its new term on Oct. 3.

If confirmed as chief justice, Roberts would oversee the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISC — a secret court whose records and hearings are closed to the public — and which Roberts himself called an "unusual" and "surprising" institution.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Roberts if he would work with Congress to add more transparency to the FISC, which primarily oversees FBI requests for surveillance warrants against targeted foreign intelligence agents in the United States.

"Senator, you said you think this is something most Americans aren't aware of. I suggest probably most judges aren't aware of it," Roberts said. He agreed that he would be sensitive to this special court's seeming lack of protections of individual's civil liberties.

Senators had their own secret 30-minute meeting Thursday to review the nominee's FBI background report. Leahy would say only that it was "pretty routine."

Witnesses speak

Before completing the hearings, the Committee invited 30 witnesses — 15 chosen by the Democrats and 15 by the Republicans — to testify about Roberts' record and give personal insight about the man behind the black robes.

Representatives from Planned Parenthood, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund and the National Women's Law Center urged senators to reject the nominee based on their disapproval of his legal record.

Former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh called Roberts an independent and objective judge, warning that it would be a mistake to equate his personal views with the positions he took as an advocate in conservative administrations.

Some witnesses withheld their opinions on Roberts, instead telling stories of hardship that turned to opportunity when they won cases before the Supreme Court.

A girls' basketball coach from Alabama, who was fired when he spoke out on unfair treatment for female sports teams, asked the senators to confirm justices who would protect civil rights. A paraplegic court reporter, who fought to enforce accessibility in Tennessee's courtrooms after being forced to ask strangers to carry her up stairs, asked the committee to scrutinize Roberts' record on protecting those with disabilities.

Many of Roberts' supporters included friends and former colleagues who punctuated their effusive praise of the conservative nominee by declaring, "and I'm a lifelong Democrat."

Bruce Botelho, mayor of Juneau, Alaska, said when he learned of the nomination, he tried to let the judge out of a promise to meet with a group of visiting Boy Scouts.

"His [e-mail] reply at 2 a.m. was, 'Nonsense, I can think of no more valuable use of my time,'" Botelho said, adding that the Boy Scouts thought he was a "pretty good guy."