There are certainly a few things in John Roberts short career as a judge to be concerned about — notably the notion, advanced in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, that the president or his deputies can abscond with someone (a U.S. citizen, perhaps) and put him or her before a special military kangaroo court; and the kind of Constitution-in-Exile “libertarian” view in his opinion to “reconsider” something as settled as the Endangered Species Act. We’ll certainly be writing about those soon.

But the dictatorial executive and the broken-arm legislature are not ideas that get the “base” — the vocal one — excited. No, your Perkinses and Dobsons are obsessed with one issue, abortion, plus a few hors d’oeuvre like gays, church-and-state, etc., and they believe Bush made a pact with them to nominate someone who would overturn Roe and allow the institution of their Moralist state.

And they seem pretty happy.

Roberts has shown strong conservative credentials with indications that he will not uphold Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that decriminalized abortion. Roberts coauthored a 1990 legal brief that stated, “The court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion … finds no support in the text, structure or history of the Constitution.”
– Operation Rescue

It seems to us that a justice who will not use his power to redefine traditional marriage, strike under God from the Pledge of Allegiance, and undermine private property rights is well within the mainstream of American public opinion and legal thought.
– C. Boydon Gray, Committee for Justice

The nomination of Judge John G. Roberts is an answer to the prayers of millions of Americans.
– Rev. Rob Schenck, National Clergy Council

We are believing that President Bush kept his campaign promise today when he nominated John Roberts to the Supreme Court. We are trusting that Judge Roberts is in the mold of Supreme Court justices who President Bush promised to appoint to the Supreme Court: such as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
– Roberta Combs, Christian Coalition

That’s exactly the kind of judge I want to appear before when I bring my case to the Supreme Court for the third time later this year. … I don’t just have a personal interest in this nomination. John C. Roberts would help to stem the tide of judicial activism that has brought ruin to our country. I encourage all advocates for life to strongly support his nomination.
– Joe Scheidler, Pro-Life Action League

President Bush is to be commended for keeping his promise to the American people by selecting such an impartial, accomplished jurist to fill this crucial seat on the high court.
– James Dobson, Focus on the Family

It’s true that Roberts hasn’t ruled on abortion in his short time as D.C. Circuit judge. But while Deputy Solicitor General under the first Bush, he had quite a bit to say while arguing in front of the Supreme Court. In his brief on behalf of the government’s gag-rule against clinic doctors mentioning family planning, Roberts wrote: “We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled … . [T]he Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion … find[s] no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.”

As many point out, including Roberts himself in his recent circuit-court confirmation hearing, he was in some sense arguing on behalf of a “client.” Certainly this should give us caution in rushing to judgment — and liberals have been a little too cautious so far — but for two things. First, this is no ordinary “client” — as Robert Bork has pointed out regarding his time in that office, “A government attorney is sworn to uphold the Constitution.” Second, the case being argued did not directly consider Roe itself — it was about whether doctors receiving federal funds could talk about abortion at all. If you’re trying to convince the Court that this gag rule is consistent with Roe, why would you undermine that logic by presupposing Roe is wrong?

The right wing has certainly made clear that John Roberts fits their bill. I think we can safely agree that he’s their man.