---

Wife of Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts Was Feminists for Life Executive Vice President

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 21, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As the intense scrutiny of every possibly relevant aspect of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts begins, pro-life groups have been pleased to discover that his wife, Jane Roberts, once served as the Executive Vice President of the strongly pro-life Feminists For Life (FFL).

The FFL, according to its website, is dedicated "to systematically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion-primarily lack of practical resources and support-through holistic, woman-centered solutions." Jane Roberts, who is herself an accomplished lawyer, presently continues to perform pro bono legal work for FFL. She is also a member of the board of governors of the John Carroll Society, a Catholic lay organization that sponsors the annual Washington archdiocesan Red Mass before the opening of the Supreme Court term.

John Roberts is himself a faithful Catholic and a parishioner at Little Flower Parish in Bethesda, Maryland. Married in their forties John and Jane Roberts were unable to conceive children of their own, but have adopted a boy and a girl, and Roberts has consistently shown a deep love for his role as a father. "I think right now undoubtedly what John likes is spending time with Jack and Josie [his children]," said Richard Lazarus, a Georgetown law professor and long-time friend of Roberts.

Even before the official announcement of John Roberts as Bush's nominee, Pro-Choice America (NARAL) denounced Roberts and updated their website with the headline, "Don't let his choice end yours...There is little doubt that [Roberts] will work to overturn Roe vs. Wade." Pro-Choice America asked abortion supporters to write their senators in opposition to Roberts' nomination and to donate to NARAL.

Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network, however, highlighted Roberts' impeccable judicial credentials: "Judge Roberts' record and his testimony before the Senate when he was confirmed unanimously for the D.C. Circuit two years ago reflect a jurist who prizes faithfulness to the Constitution and the rule of law, and who respects the limited role of federal courts in our constitutional system of government."

In many ways Roberts' testimony before the Senate on that occasion is reflective of his conscientious judicial integrity. Roberts was grilled by Democratic senators about his personal position on several specific Supreme Court cases, but he consistently demurred from answering, citing his judicial responsibility not to undermine or do damage to the federal courts. "I want to be responsive," said Roberts when asked his personal opinion on Roe V. Wade, "but at the same time, I think that it is important that I avoid doing anything that is going to be harmful to the federal courts as an institution."

In fact, many are pointing out that what makes Roberts a fascinating pick is that Bush has chosen a candidate whose past provides little fodder for Democratic dissent. "His impressive credentials and lack of a long 'paper trail as a jurist make him a difficult target for Senate Democrats who oppose his nomination," said Forbes.

Democrats will likely point to Roberts' signing of a brief in 1991 that called for the overturning of Roe V. Wade as evidence of his pro-life sympathies. However, on several occasions Roberts has clarified that he was only presenting and defending the position of his client, and has conscientiously avoided answering subsequent questions about his personal position on the Supreme Court case or on abortion as a whole.

Republicans and conservatives on the whole fear that the Senate battle will see Democrats grilling Roberts on hypothetical situations which, as a judge, he cannot responsibly answer. The gist of the strategy is to ask unanswerable questions of a nominee and then to accuse him of holding out or having something to hide. "He's one of those nominees that you have a lot of questions about," said Sen. Charles Shumer of Roberts, confirming those fears. "As long as he answers the questions fully and openly…we'll go forward."

Senator John Cornyn said he feared that there will be "unnecessary foot-dragging" by Democrats. "It's not appropriate for a nominee to pre-judge cases," Cornyn said. "That is not what we want judges to do."

See Feminists for Life on Jane Roberts:
http://www.feministsforlife.org/news/jsroberts.htm

jj

 Back to Top

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.