The Calm After the Storm

By KAREN TUMULTY

Minutes after Ronald Reagan nominated Robert Bork in 1987, Senator Edward Kennedy charged onto the Senate floor and thundered that the ascension of the conservative judge to the Supreme Court would be the end of America as we know it. Kennedy's blast set the tone for that doomed nomination, so White House officials felt no small amount of relief last week at the reception that John Roberts received when he made his trip into the liberal lion's den. Roberts emerged from Kennedy's office with his hide intact--and a map of Ireland. Sure enough, Kennedy had been assembling every scrap of information he could get about Roberts and had discovered that the ancestral home of Roberts' wife is a mere 10 miles from that of Kennedy's mother in Limerick.

All year, Washington has been gearing up for a monster fight over filling the first Supreme Court vacancy in 11 years. Instead, the city watched its political generals and foot soldiers put their guns back into their holsters last week. After his meeting with Roberts, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid went so far as to praise the work Roberts had done on behalf of environmental interests in Reid's home state of Nevada. Interest groups, having raised millions in anticipation of war, quickly returned to fighting over Karl Rove. The closest thing to a battle plan that Senate liberals could come up with was to demand internal Justice Department documents they almost certainly will not get. Democrats were reduced to hoping they might hit some political pay dirt by scrutinizing what Roberts had written about the reach of the Constitution's interstate-commerce clause, which has figured in environmental and workplace regulation as well as civil rights cases, but is usually barren terrain politically.

In his first round of private interviews with Senators, Roberts described himself again and again as "modest"--a deliberate word choice that liberals would read as suggesting he wouldn't overturn previous court decisions on issues like abortion and that conservatives would read as reassurance that he wouldn't be setting social policies from the bench. He also followed the advice of his designated handler, former Senator Fred Thompson, who plays a legal sage on Law & Order but is turning out to be a political one in real life. "They like to talk," Thompson told Roberts as they met with Senators, "so let them."

And yet the relatively easy path ahead for his first Supreme Court nominee may be as much an indicator of Bush's weakness as of his strength. His sagging approval ratings, the public displeasure at events in Iraq and his inability to win support for his Social Security plan suggest that Bush doesn't have the leverage he once did: he could not afford a nominee so toxic to Democrats that the move would unravel the truce struck by a bipartisan group of 14 Senators and possibly trigger a filibuster.

That does not mean the White House is not prepared to mount a defense and ensure that its nominee cannot be tagged with any labels. It quickly corrected the initial stories that stated Roberts is a member of the Federalist Society--an influential conservative legal organization whose positions on issues like affirmative action alarm Democrats, and one to which many leading conservative and libertarian attorneys belong. And that was not the only correction that made it clear how difficult it was for interest groups to find a troubling outcropping in Roberts' resume: having described Roberts as someone who played a role in the Iran-contra affair, the Federation of American Scientists sent a second e-mail half an hour later saying it had mistaken him for another John Roberts, named in the independent counsel's report that resulted from that scandal. The Feminist Majority Foundation apologized--seven hours after the fact--for having accused Roberts of representing Hooters in a sex-discrimination case.

But the White House was not letting even the most fleeting inaccuracy go by. Aide Steve Schmidt called MSNBC to complain about a banner it ran the night of Roberts' announcement, ROBERTS: OVERTURN ROE V. WADE. The following evening, the show's host, former Congressman Joe Scarborough, said he was sorry and added wryly, "Conservatives, Republicans, members of Focus on the Family, Dr. James Dobson, Pat Robertson, pro-life advocates across America, I offer you this correction. According to the White House, Judge Roberts does not oppose Roe v. Wade. Whew. Glad I got that off my chest."

That Dobson, Robertson and other religious conservatives have been so quiet about a nominee who in his previous round of confirmation hearings called abortion "the settled law of the land" is almost as remarkable as the Democrats' near silence. But the White House has worked quietly for a year to reassure them that Roberts will be on their side, pointing to the fact that he clerked for William Rehnquist and worked in the Reagan White House. White House allies also noted his wife's antiabortion work, got conservative friends to vouch for him and offered testimonials to his Catholic Church attendance.

No one expects Roberts to answer directly any questions that Senators may pose on abortion, gay marriage and similar issues. However, Senator Sam Brownback, one of the most conservative members of the Judiciary Committee, says he will probe indirectly by asking Roberts his views of the Constitution--specifically, whether it is a "living document" or should be interpreted according to the wishes of the framers. Brownback admits he is not likely to get very far that way and says he remains wary. And disappointed? "Ask me in two years when he rules on some of these cases," Brownback says. "I'll probably be ecstatic--or really kicking myself." --With reporting by Perry Bacon Jr., Massimo Calabresi, Matthew Cooper and Eric Roston/Washington

With reporting by Perry Bacon Jr., Massimo Calabresi, Matthew Cooper, Eric Roston/Washington