Forces opposed to the confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court lost no time trying to find any argument with traction. The “e-word” — extremist — has already been employed, but that only makes those who would call Judge Roberts an extremist look foolish.
Some, including Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), warn that they must investigate whether Judge Roberts has “deeply held personal beliefs” that should be of public interest. As before, this is code language used against Christians who hold to the traditional Christian understanding of human dignity and human sexuality. This is nothing more than thinly disguised religious discrimination.
Be on watch for unprecedented and unexpected developments. Take this article from The Los Angeles Times, for example. In “There’s No Doubt About Abortion Position of Roberts’ Wife,” reporter Richard A. Serrano reports this: “A Catholic like her husband, Jane Roberts has been deeply involved in the anti-abortion movement. She lends her name, money and professional advice to a small Washington-based organization — Feminists for Life of America Inc. — that offers counseling and educational programs. The group has filed legal briefs before the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of abortion.”
Are the views, involvements, and personal convictions of a nominee’s spouse now fair game for the confirmation process? This is unprecedented and shameful. Reporter Serrano offers this analysis: “A spouse’s views normally are not considered relevant in weighing someone’s job suitability. But abortion is likely to figure prominently in the Senate debate over Roberts’ nomination. And with his position on the divisive issue unclear, abortion-rights supporters expressed concern Wednesday that his wife’s views might suggest he also embraces efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade.” Like her husband, Jane Roberts is a respected attorney who is well-known in Washington circles. This article points to the battle that is now brewing. Keep a close watch on the maneuvering.