(CNSNews.com) - The way some conservatives see it, there's no such thing as "moderation" when it comes to the topic of abortion.

And the way liberals see it, a "consensus" Supreme Court candidate is one who would defend Americans' rights, including the legal right to abortion.

Based on what the interest groups are saying, there is no room for compromise on either side. And that means furious opposition in the days ahead, from whichever "side" feels slighted by President Bush's Supreme Court pick.

Conservatives are worried, even though President Bush is conservative, too.

Judie Brown, president of American Life League, said President Bush must keep his word to the pro-lifers who elected him by nominating a pro-life Supreme Court justice:

"The retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor provides a tremendous opportunity for President Bush to keep his word to those who elected him and demonstrate the pro-life position he professes," Brown said in a press release.

Bush was meeting with a group of senators at the White House on Tuesday, apparently to discuss various Supreme Court candidates, and people from all points on the political spectrum are watching closely

President Bush has said he does not have a litmus test for the person he chooses.

"I'll pick people who one, can do the job; people who are honest, people who are bright; and people who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not use the bench to legislate from. That's what I campaigned on, and that's what I'm going to do," Bush told reporters in Denmark on July 6.

Conservatives who want the Supreme Court to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling say they would feel betrayed if President Bush nominates a moderate to the nation's highest court.

"One can be moderate on some political issues, but there's no such thing as moderation when discussing abortion," Brown said. "Abortion is not a political issue. We are talking about life and death for our fellow human beings."

The American Life League says now is the time for the pro-life community to speak up and demand that President Bush keep his promises.

"By nominating a strong, 100 percent pro-life justice to sit on the nation's highest court, President Bush can truly help to build a culture of life in American society and beyond," Brown said.

"American Life League respectfully implores President Bush to stand on his professed convictions and nominate an individual who will hold a strict interpretation of constitutional law...The Constitution calls for the protection of all human persons, not their destruction through abortion."
Status quo

A coalition of liberal-leaning groups has sent a letter to President Bush, telling him he must nominate a "consensus" candidate to the Supreme Court.

According to the Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary, the nominee must safeguard the "rights, freedoms, and legal protections of all Americans." That includes the legal right to abortion.

"If you send the Senate a nominee who, like Justice O'Connor, is committed to preserving the rights, liberties, and legal protections Americans rely on, you will help heal division and spare the nation a polarizing confirmation battle," the letter to Bush said.

The Coalition noted that the confirmation process was "smooth and swift" when President Ronald Reagan nominated a consensus candidate (Justice Sandra Day O'Connor) who was "acceptable to all Democrats."

Likewise, the Coalition said, "President Bill Clinton sought and took the advice of Senator Orrin Hatch - then in the minority party - by nominating Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer."

The Coalition said just as President Bush is taking his time to select a nominee, "senators must have the time and opportunity to make a judgment based on a fully informed understanding of a nominee's views on the law."

See Earlier Story:
Gonzales: 'Constitution Is What the Supreme Court Says' (7 July 2005)