Copyright 2005 Copley News Service  Copley News Service September 13, 2005 Tuesday SECTION: WASHINGTON WIRE LENGTH: 727 words Feinstein, Roberts spar over abortion, nominee's attitude towards women BY Finlay Lewis Copley News Service WASHINGTON -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein and John Roberts sparred on Tuesday over abortion in an inconclusive exchange that highlighted the misgivings on the part of many abortion rights advocates towards Roberts' nomination to become the nation's next chief justice. At issue was whether Roberts, a conservative who has expressed doubts about the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Roe decision, would use his leverage as chief justice to overturn that ruling or would accept it as settled law. By the time her allotted half hour of questions had been exhausted, Roberts' thinking remained carefully concealed by his polite refusals to commit himself in advance on issues that might well command the court's attention in the future. The abortion issue had already been broached by other, more senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, including the chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and a supporter of abortion rights.  But, as the only woman on the 18-member panel, Feinstein placed special emphasis on the issue, noting at one point, "Unlike my experience, there are now entire generations of women who know a world only where their reproductive rights are protected." She also quizzed Roberts about the separation of church and state, medical marijuana, Congress' ability to use its constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce to achieve diverse policy goals, and his skepticism about using that authority to protect the arroyo southwestern toad - a creature found only in California that has never been known to cross state lines. Feinstein used her opening questions in an apparent attempt to place Roberts, now a judge on the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, on the defensive. She quoted from memos and other documents Roberts had written as an aide in the Reagan administration in which he questioned whether encouraging "homemakers" to become lawyers would serve the "common good." In those writings, he appeared to mock proposals to guarantee that women should receive equal pay with men performing the same tasks in the work force. She also called attention to a Roberts' memo in 1982 about a women's committee studying discriminatory laws in which he described the panel as "a ladies' task force." "I mention these examples to highlight what appears to be an acerbic pen or else you really thought that way," Feinstein said. "Did you really think that way or do you think that way today?" "I have always supported, and support today, equal rights for women, particularly in the workplace," said Roberts, who referred to a favorable report on his behalf by a national group of women lawyers. In explaining his remark about "homemakers" who become lawyers, Roberts said that gender was irrelevant to what he wrote, adding, "Whether they were homemakers, plumbers, artists, truck drivers (that) had nothing to do with it. The point was, is it good to have more lawyers ... That's a common joke that goes back to Shakespeare. It has nothing to do with homemakers." "I'm just trying to understand how you think," Feinstein countered. "You speak about modesty and humility, and yet none of these comments are modest or humble." Feinstein, who frequently links her Senate career to the abortion issue and the outrage she detected among many women over the 1991 confirmation hearings of Justice Clarence Thomas, sought to win from Roberts a commitment to abide by the court's decision in 1992 in a Pennsylvania case. That decision upheld the Roe decision which establishes the right of women to obtain abortions. That case, Casey v. Planned Parenthood, bans states from outlawing most abortions. Roberts, reiterating earlier answers on this issue, said he would accord great weight to court precedent. In his testimony, Roberts has also sketched out the reasons why the court occasionally overturns precedent, and he declined to rule out that possibility with respect to abortion. Pressing Roberts, Feinstein noted that the court majority, in the Casey decision, reached its decision on the grounds that many women planned their reproductive decisions in reliance on the Roe ruling. She asked Roberts whether he was persuaded by that reasoning. "That is certainly where I would begin if any of these issues come before the court if I were to be confirmed," Roberts responded.