From
tomorrow's New York Times:
Yet while it may appear at the outset that the confirmation of Judge Roberts is all but assured, memories of bitterly contested confirmation hearings for Robert H. Bork in 1987 and Clarence Thomas in 1991 are still fresh on Capitol Hill, and many senators know from experience that there are no guarantees.
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and a committee member, recounted a recent conversation with Justice Thomas: "I said, 'It looks like the Roberts nomination is going pretty smooth.' He said, 'Chuck, remember, I was nominated in July, and I didn't become controversial until October.'"
Indeed. An important point not to be overlooked is that while much of the country may not have been paying attention, our Democratic Senators know we are watching closely. This is a test for them as well:
Democrats, who were already planning to press Judge Roberts on civil rights, are likely to be even more aggressive on that front, citing the racial divisions exposed by the hurricane. But they must be careful not to push too hard, some political analysts say, because the suffering on the Gulf Coast has left the public with little appetite for a partisan slugfest. . . . Democrats may be more likely to hold their fire, said Doug Schoen, a Democratic pollster, particularly given that polls show that most Americans expect Judge Roberts to be confirmed. "In the absence of specifics that would throw his nomination into doubt, Democrats will be loath to want to be as combative and confrontational as they might otherwise be," Mr. Schoen said.
I will say this to our Democratic Senators -- if you listen to Schoen, there will be hell to pay with your Democratic constituency. Schoen will always tell you not to make waves. He always does. I think it is clear now that what we need are Fighting Dems. Not Schoen Dems.
We may have some:
Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the senior Democrat on the panel, has said he will question Judge Roberts on the so-called Bybee memorandum, a document, now disavowed by the Bush administration, that outlined a narrow definition of torture.
Ms. Feinstein is likely to carry the banner on Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that legalized abortion. Judge Roberts has written that the case was "wrongly decided" but has also remarked that it is "settled law," seemingly contradictory statements that Ms. Feinstein is likely to explore.
And of course Senator Kennedy and Senator Schumer will be there fighting hard. But we expect rigor from all of them.