The Senate Judiciary Committee voted yesterday to recommend John G. Roberts Jr. ’76 to be the nation’s seventeenth chief justice, making the judge’s confirmation before the full Senate next week almost certain.

In the 13-to-5 vote, three Democrats on the committee joined its 10 Republican members to endorse Roberts, while the remaining five Democratic senators voted against him.

The committee’s recommendation takes Roberts—a 50-year-old graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School—to the next stage in the confirmation process: a Senate-wide debate set to begin on Monday.

Joining the Republican bloc were Senators Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl, both of Wisconsin, as well as Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, the committee’s ranking member.

The five Democrats opposing Roberts’ nomination were Senators Joseph R. Biden of Delaware, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Edward M. Kennedy ’54-’56 of Massachusetts, and Charles E. Schumer ’71 of New York.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, praised Roberts’ judicial philosophy, but remained cautious about how President Bush’s nominee would act once on the Supreme Court.

“His approach of modesty and stability, and away from judicial activism, I think, is a model,” Specter said yesterday. “Whether it is carried out remains to be seen.”

Republicans present, including Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who has served on the committee for 29 years, lauded Roberts’ qualifications and his performance during the hearings.

“I have never in my whole time here seen a witness who made such sense and who literally was so superior in every way,” Hatch said. “He’s as good as it gets.”

Explaining his opposing vote, Schumer emphasized Roberts’ reluctance during last week’s hearings to discuss details of issues that might come before the Supreme Court again—a concern shared both by some senators on both sides of yesterday’s vote.

“We’re still unsure of how to answer Roberts?’” Schumer said.

Feinstein also focused on Roberts’ reticence in justifying her vote.

“I don’t ask for promises,” she said. “But I asked for some ability to find a commitment to broad legal principles that form the basis of our fundamental rights.”

Some of the Democrats who opposed Roberts’ nomination noted that their decisions had not come easily, saying that they had made their votes “regretfully” or “reluctantly.”

Feingold said that his vote in favor of Roberts’ nomination “does not endorse his refusal to answer reasonable questions.”