Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, July 25, 1990 TAG: 9007250502
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A/1 EDITION: EVENING
SOURCE: SUSAN PAGE NEWSDAY
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
But the battle probably has been delayed, not avoided.
"It's hard to envision right now a firestorm that would lead to a major confirmation battle over this nominee," Michael McCurry, communications director of the Democratic National Committee, said Tuesday in an interview. "But it's very possible to envision a firestorm over the likely consequences of confirming him."
The first reaction to Souter generally has been positive. Key senators said they won't press the jurist to state his views on abortion rights; the potential liberal opposition already seems to be splintering over approach and tactics.
By choosing a sitting judge who is widely respected but has left no "paper trail" of his views on the court's most contentious issues - in contrast to Robert Bork, the failed 1987 Supreme Court nominee who had written provocatively about almost everything - Bush gave potential critics little grounds for opposition.
Assuming that Judge Souter becomes Justice Souter, however, he will have to vote on abortion as well as other divisive questions, and probably before the 1992 elections. With that, some analysts believe, this bookish New Hampshire bachelor could create political problems for the president and his party, whatever position he ultimately takes.
If Souter unexpectedly shores up the faltering court majority that has upheld the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision establishing abortion rights, Bush could expect fireworks from his conservative political base - already restive because of his flip-flop on taxes and his conciliatory approach to the Soviet Union. "It will be a big, big problem," warned Alan Keyes, president of a conservative advocacy group, Citizens for America.
But if Souter provides the crucial vote to overturn that landmark decision, some strategists predict a powerful political backlash by the majority of Americans who generally support abortion rights. That would include many moderate Republican suburbanites and younger voters, groups critical to GOP victories. Last year's court decision opening the door to some state abortion restrictions caused such turmoil that it helped elect two Democratic governors.
"It would be a disaster, an absolute disaster, either way," moaned one prominent Republican consultant who asked to remain anonymous. "It leaves the president in a lose-lose situation."
The decision might well be handed down at a time that would maximize its political impact. The Supreme Court hasn't yet accepted a direct challenge to Roe vs. Wade for the 1990-91 session, though it still could do so. But disputes over anti-abortion laws in Pennsylvania or Guam or possibly Louisiana could reach the Supreme Court the following year. That could mean a decision would be released in the spring of 1992 - just as the presidential-year elections were getting into full swing.
Bush is expected to be running for re-election then. And Republicans harbor hopes of winning control of the Senate in 1992.
At this point, neither the White House nor the Senate can be sure what Souter would do on the Supreme Court. Conservatives were cautiously supportive Tuesday - "We're wearing nervous smiles," activist Richard Viguerie said - and liberals were skeptical.
But once on the bench, justices are on their own, for life. When he wanted a conservative for the Supreme Court, President Eisenhower also turned to a little-known state jurist - William Brennan, now retiring, who much to Eisenhower's consternation, became a leading liberal voice on the court for a generation.
by CNB