During the 2004 election season, I supported Republican Senator Arlen Specter over Democratic challenger Joe Hoeffel for a number of reasons, the most important of which was the fact that if Specter -- who is pro-choice -- lost while the GOP maintained its majority, ultra-conservative Senator Jon Kyl would have become chairman of the Judiciary Committee (as I opined in October).

Upon winning reelection in November, Specter immediately infuriorated conservatives by imploying that an anti-choice nominee would not make it on to the Supreme Court. Although he partially stepped back from the statement, his true convictions were apparent. Now, as The New York Times' Sheryl Gay Stolberg reports, Specter is putting these beliefs into action.

In the first hint of how he will steer the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Judge John G. Roberts Jr., Senator Arlen Specter, the Judiciary Committee chairman, said Monday that he would press the nominee for his views on specific cases involving the authority of Congress to pass broad social legislation, a power that Democrats fear will be rolled back by a more conservative court.

In a three-page letter to Judge Roberts, Mr. Specter raises pointed questions about two recent court decisions invalidating legislation Congress passed under its authority to regulate interstate commerce. That power has for decades been used to produce expansive legislation, including environmental protections, civil rights laws and the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The current court has been trimming back the authority, however, and Democrats have vowed to make interstate commerce a big issue in the Roberts hearings. Now Mr. Specter, a Republican who is widely regarded as the panel's sharpest constitutional lawyer, is suggesting that he shares the Democrats' concerns.

"I think Republicans have a duty to pursue this line of questioning and any relevant line of questioning," Mr. Specter said on Monday in a telephone interview from his home in Philadelphia.

[...]

Though not as volatile as the debate over Roe v. Wade, a decision Mr. Specter said he would also ask about, the debate on interstate commerce could prove as significant in the confirmation hearings. The Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate commerce "among the several states," an authority that has led to a variety of programs of the New Deal era and was broadly interpreted for more than half a century.

What was the response to the letter?

Democrats and liberal advocacy groups, caught off guard by Mr. Specter's letter, were elated.

[...]

Conservatives, already wary of Mr. Specter and his moderate brand of Republican politics and generally supportive of the Rehnquist court decisions, were not pleased.

Unfortunately, today there are far too few Senators like Specter who are willing to eschew the party line from time to time and stick to the middle instead. Specter, in particular, is an interesting case as he will never have to run for reelection again (most likely, at least), and is thus free to vote his conscience.

Specter, more than any other member of the Senate today, has the power to shape the court for the next thirty years. As Judiciary Chairman, he alone could upend Roberts' nomination. Although it is much too soon to speculate whether Specter will go to the mat for Roe, the Commerce Clause, and other constitutional beliefs of the post-war era, this story implies that he at least will not give up without a fight. And for this, all Americans are better off.