Privacy rights at stake in Court nomination

One of the best things about life in Montana is that we know and trust our neighbors. And by Montana standards, our neighbors can live next door or on the next ranch, in the next county or across the state. Montana is one big small town, separated by a few stoplights and cattle guards and lots of miles of pavement and gravel roads.

And when Montanans pitch in to help neighbors going through tough times, we also firmly draw the line when it comes to anyone poking around our private lives. It's the Montana way to mind our own business, and we expect others to respect our privacy as well.

That's why President Bush's nomination of Judge John G. Roberts as the next United States Supreme Court Chief Justice is troubling. While we expect our neighbors to keep their noses out of our bedrooms, Judge Roberts has opposed our basic right to privacy — especially a woman's right to healthcare privacy — by arguing Roe v. Wade was "wrongly decided and should be overruled." Judge Roberts' thinking on Roe is in utter opposition to the 65 percent of Americans who want Roe upheld — and worse yet, sets in motion the threat of our privacy rights being abandoned for generations to come.

Our country needs assurance that the highest court in the land will not be used to take away our rights. With the United States Supreme Court closely mirroring the country's divide, one man's vote — Judge Roberts' vote — could mean the difference between a nation that upholds and celebrates our right to privacy, or one that allows the government to pry into our most private healthcare matters. Judge Roberts' vote could mean the difference between equal opportunity for all, or one that allows the last and least to fall farther behind.

Judge Roberts' vote could mean the difference between a nation that protects workers' rights to choose a voice at work, or one that stifles workplace democracy. Judge Roberts' vote could mean the difference between a nation that secures justice for all, or one that sees justice go to the highest bidder. Judge Roberts' vote could mean the difference between a nation that trusts its citizens, or one that checks up on what library books we read.

In a short while, the United States Senate will vote on Judge Roberts' nomination as the Chief Justice — an appointment that by law, lasts a lifetime. The Democratic Party is supporting the call for the White House to release information on Judge Roberts' past writings and work. It's reasonable and fair to want to know how a judge — especially one who could serve 30 or 40 years or more — views the important issues that face our country. Senators and ordinary Americans and Montanans need every bit of information at our disposal in order to make an informed decision on the appointment.

I hope the nomination process will be civil and dignified. Because what's at stake isn't a Democratic Party issue or a Republican Party issue. What's at stake is more important than partisan politics. It's about our future, especially the future of our mothers and daughters, nieces and granddaughters.

We owe it to them to act with all diligent care.