It is a political reality, Hatch said, that whoever controls the White House has the right to nominate justices, and "in undertaking our advise and consent role, the Senate — due to the Constitution, prudence and tradition — owes a degree of deference to the president's nominees."

Both of Clinton's Supreme Court nominees, who were seen by Republicans as social liberals, received broad bipartisan support.

Given the opposition by Senate Democratic leadership to the Roberts nomination, Hatch said it is not likely Roberts will receive the same kind of Democratic support Democratic nominees received from Republicans.

"I think this is unfortunate, unjustified and unfair," Hatch said. "Frankly, I do not think this result can be wholly explained by anything that John Roberts did or said, or did not say, over the course of his exemplary 25-year career as a lawyer."

Hatch said history will look back favorably on the Senate vote to confirm Roberts, not, as some Democratic senators suggested, as a roll of the dice.

"To me, supporting John Roberts is a sound investment in our nation's future, not some long-shot bet," Hatch said. "John Roberts' long and distinguished record as an advocate and judge over the past 25 years, buttressed by his recent confirmation hearing testimony, demonstrate that he is a bright, careful and thoughtful legal professional of the highest integrity and character. He is not an ideologue inclined to, or bent on, high court mischief."

---

Contributing: Associated Press.

E-mail: spang@desnews.com