WASHINGTON -- Senators on Tuesday grilled controversial nominee Richard Honaker over whether he would rule fairly in abortion cases if confirmed as a federal judge in Wyoming.

A key Democrat said his answers did not satisfy her.

The questions about whether Honaker, a Rock Springs lawyer, could serve impartially came as the Senate Judiciary Committee took up his nomination to be U.S. District Court judge in Cheyenne.

Numerous groups have mounted a campaign against his nomination, saying he holds extreme views on abortion and religion. Honaker, who as a Wyoming state legislator proposed what would have been the nation’s toughest restrictions on abortion, promised that as a judge he would follow legal precedent on the issue.

Wyoming’s two senators introduced Honaker to the committee, expressing their support for his nomination to the lifetime position. Although the panel also considered three other judicial nominees, the toughest questions centered on Honaker, 57.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told Honaker that his nomination has become “quite controversial” and asked him about legislation that he had introduced in 1991 called the “Human Life Protection Act.” That measure would have outlawed abortions except in cases where a woman’s life was in jeopardy or in cases of rape or incest. The woman would have had to report such a crime within five days.

The measure failed in the Wyoming House Judiciary Committee, and Honaker’s effort to reintroduce it in 1992 also did not succeed.

Feinstein quoted Honaker as saying the measure was “a direct challenge” to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. She asked him twice whether his legislation adhered to the constitutional right to privacy recognized in that ruling.

Honaker said his bill had been a legislative challenge to Roe v. Wade. But he said the role of a district judge is “absolutely contrary” the role he played as a legislator, and that as a judge he would follow Supreme Court precedent.

“I recognize the right to privacy, and I recognize the precedent of the United States Supreme Court,” he said.

Feinstein responded that he never answered her question whether his legislation adhered to the right to privacy. “But if that’s your answer, so be it,” she added.

In a second round of questions, Feinstein noted that his bill included an exemption for the life of the mother but not her health, and said both are required. Honaker responded that in his personal opinion, “health” has not been defined specifically enough. He also said it’s his personal view that the abortion issue should be settled in a “pro-life way.”

But he added that as a judge he would certainly apply the precedents set by the Supreme Court, including Roe v. Wade. “That is the law of the land, and I would apply it,” he said.

Asked in a brief interview after the hearing whether Honaker’s answers satisfied her, Feinstein said, “No, I was not,” but declined to comment further.

In a letter to the executive director of an abortion-rights group that opposes his nomination, Honaker wrote that “on such a controversial subject, the losing party would appeal to the Tenth Circuit, and perhaps on to the United States Supreme Court, and nobody would remember what the trial judge did anyhow.”

Asked about that at the hearing, Honaker said that portion of the letter was not well written and has been misinterpreted.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., asked whether Honaker had been seeking with his legislation to take the issue back to the Supreme Court. Honaker said the bill would have allowed that court to re-examine the precedent if it so chose. But he added that since he left the state Legislature he has not been involved in the abortion issue at all.

After his legislative efforts failed, Honaker represented an advocacy group in its appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court to allow the measure as a statewide ballot initiative. The court let the measure on the ballot, but Wyoming voters rejected it in 1994. But Honaker said Tuesday the issue for him in that case was access to the ballot, “not abortion per se.”

Asked by Specter whether he would follow the “letter and the spirit” of Roe v. Wade, Honaker said he would.

'Eminently qualified'

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., noted that he served with Honaker in the state Legislature, praised his qualifications and said numerous Democrats and Republicans in Wyoming support his nomination. Enzi noted that some “special interest groups” do not but that nearly all nominees face some opposition.

“Since the criteria is fairness, I want to assure you that Richard Honaker is one of the fairest people I know,” Enzi said.

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., called Honaker “eminently qualified” and said there is no question he is ready to fill the job.

NARAL Pro-Choice America and its Wyoming chapter have been actively opposing Honaker’s nomination. They organized a letter last year signed by 20 other groups, including the National Organization of Women, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the National Partnership for Women and Families, urging the Senate not to take up his nomination.

Other groups, including People for the American Way and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, are opposing his nomination because they say he has a disturbing record on the principle of government neutrality toward religion and a legal philosophy that threatens church-state separation.

Honaker declined to answer reporters’ questions Tuesday.

The late Sen. Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., submitted Honaker's name to the White House as a possible nominee to replace retiring U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer. President Bush nominated Honaker in March, and Enzi pushed hard for the hearing.

The Judiciary Committee does not vote on nominees at its hearings, so the Democrats in charge of the committee would have to schedule a vote at a future committee business meeting. If the panel approves Honaker's nomination, the full Senate would then have to approve it.

A Laramie native, Honaker graduated from Harvard in 1973 and received his law degree from the University of Wyoming in 1976. He currently has a private practice in Rock Springs and is past president of the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association and the Wyoming State Bar. He switched his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican in 1994.