From time to time the nomination of a new justice to fill a vacancy on the United States Supreme Court serves as a reminder to ordinary people of the powerful part the court plays in their day-to-day lives. The nomination by President George W. Bush of Judge John Roberts is one of those times.
Judge Roberts is something of an unknown quantity, with a thin record on controversial subjects. So there will be more interest than usual during confirmation hearings in the Senate as Democrats try to tease out his views on a range of issues such as abortion rights, gay rights, assisted suicide, protection of the environment and same-sex marriage.
He is Mr Bush's choice to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate conservative who often sided with her more liberal colleagues on the finely balanced nine-member bench in five-four decisions. Justice O'Connor cast the decisive votes in two abortion-rights test cases in 2000.
Given the president's hardline 'pro-life' approach on abortion, assisted suicide, stem-cell research and other moral issues, liberals fear a conservative appointment that would swing the balance of opinion in the court for years to come.
Supreme Court justices are appointed for life. As the first nomination for 11 years to an evenly divided bench, this is Mr Bush's first - and perhaps only - chance to shape policy long after he has gone. Conservatives urged him to choose a strict conservative who could be expected to adopt a 'pro-life' stance.
Liberals would be happy if Judge Roberts turned out to be a swing judge like Justice O'Connor. His record gives conflicting clues.
