up behind Senator Hal Killian (D-Wisconsin). It would be the unforgiving eye that piped Millie’s face across the country.
She tried not to look at it. Her hands, one on top of the other in front of her, trembled slightly. She breathed in and out, in and out. This was it, the last wall of fire she would have to walk through before becoming chief justice of the Supreme Court.
Committee chairman Sam Levering gaveled the proceedings to order at 10 a.m. He gave Millie a quick nod, just as if nothing had ever happened between them.
Levering read from a prepared statement.
“The Constitution empowers the president to nominate the chief justice of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate. That is clear-cut, straightforward language. It does not advise that the process become a protracted ordeal of unreasonable delay and unrelenting investigation. Yet somewhere along the way, Senate confirmations became lengthy, partisan, and unpleasant. They have done enough harm, and that must not happen again.
“I am very glad to welcome Associate Justice Millicent Mannings Hollander, nominated by the president to assume the chief justice position of our highest court. She has served the Supreme Court for ten years with distinction, and I can only hope that my colleagues will move quickly on this nomination. That would indeed be news.”
Levering paused to smile for the cameras and the gallery. The ranking minority member, Senator Chuck Gelfan (R-Iowa), scowled. He was known as a relentless questioner with the sense of humor of a board. He had been on the committee during Millie’s first hearing, ten years ago, and had thrown a number of verbal darts. She had managed to avoid them, but soon enough it would be round two. Gelfan looked like he couldn’t wait.
“Justice Hollander has not prepared a statement,” Levering said, “so I will begin by swearing in the witness.”
Millie stood, raised her right hand, and was given a solemn oath by the man who had tried to grope her.
Levering began the questioning. “Good morning, Madame Justice.”
“Good morning, Senator,” Millie said.
“First,” Levering began, “tell us how you’re feeling. The entire country was concerned when you had that unfortunate accident.”
Smooth as silk. Innocent as a lamb. Millie leaned forward a little. “I am doing quite well, thank you. Almost one hundred percent.”
“That’s great news. Just great. We all welcome you back to Washington.”
Senator Gelfan glared at her.
“I have only a few questions,” said Levering. “Your judicial philosophy is well known. As chief justice, will you remain the bedrock of common sense and decency you have always been?”
What was she going to say to that? No, Senator, I plan on running a crap game behind the bench. “I hope so, Senator.”
“Will you continue to uphold the principles we hold dear?”
“I will always try to do so.”
“Then I have no other questions,” Levering said. “Senator Gelfan, you may proceed. I would like to remind my colleagues that we’ll keep the questions to five minutes each this round.”
The older senator picked up a paper and began to read what his staff had prepared for him. “Over the past three decades this country has seen an erosion of the dignity afforded human life, most specifically unborn human life. Madame Justice, will you continue to align yourself on the side of those who would allow the taking of unborn human life?”
A few groans came up from the gallery. Senator Levering winced. Millie had been expecting the question, but not her reaction. A sharp pain twisted inside her. Could the cameras see? She fought for calm.
“Senator Gelfan,” Millie said, “as you know there are cases dealing with that issue that are, or will be, granted review. It would not be ethical for me to comment beforehand on how I might rule.”
Gelfan lowered the paper and directed a choleric gaze at Millie. “This is a question of supreme importance to the majority of Americans. Don’t you think they have a right to know what the next chief justice might have in mind?”
“Senator, what all Americans have a right to is an independent judiciary, free of political influence.” That had come out sharply, and she was glad. A little fighting spirit to steady her nerves.
“Do you continue to believe the Court’s decision in
“I…” She stopped suddenly, and there was that pain again. It stitched up from her stomach and burned to the top of her head.
“You were about to say?” Senator Gelfan said, like a cat pouncing on a wounded sparrow.
“My past decisions… are a matter of record.”
“That’s not what I asked you,” Gelfan said. “My question was, as you sit here today, do you continue to believe that Roe v. Wade was decided correctly?”
“Senator…”
“It’s a simple yes or no question, Justice Hollander.”
Levering leaned into his microphone. “Point of order – ”
Like an angry pit bull, Gelfan whirled on the chairman. “I am asking the questions – ”
“Point of order!”
“ – and I do not – ”
“This is not an adversarial proceeding.”
“ – appreciate the interruption.”
Millie sat back, feeling almost surreal, as if she were disembodied and given a seat in the gallery to watch this circus. But she was grateful for the slight pause.
“As chairman, I will have my say,” Levering said. Gelfan leaned back in his chair, his weathered face pinched into a scowl.
“When my predecessor was in this chair,” Levering said, referring to Gelfan, who was chairman when the Republicans controlled the Senate, “and certain nominees came before us, those of us on this side of the aisle were lectured, over and over again, not to ask questions on specific issues. Not to make these hearings into litmus tests. I now find it quite troubling that, with the shoe on the other foot, my good friend from Iowa wants to change this policy. I will make this short and sweet. Madame Justice, do you believe it would violate your oath and your ethics to answer specific questions about specific issues that may come before the Court?”
“Yes,” Millie said. “I do believe that.”
“Senator Gelfan,” Levering said.
The Iowa senator was being handed a sheet of paper from an aide. He looked at Millie. “But you may answer questions about your judicial philosophy. That is not improper, is it?”
Millie took a deep breath. “With all due respect, Senator, my judicial philosophy is evident in my opinions.”
“Then I will ask you this. Is that judicial philosophy evolving?”
“Evolving?”
“Changing in any way. Surely the American people have a right to know that.”
Millie squinted into the lights. She had always been of the “living, breathing Constitution” school, the idea that changes in society mandated changes in how one viewed the law. For one thing, it sounded right. Who could be against flexibility when it came to justice?
