Oct. 26 (Bloomberg) -- A 1993 speech by U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet E. Miers prompted new skepticism from some Senate Republicans about whether she has a consistently conservative judicial philosophy about abortion, religion and the role of courts.

These Republicans said Miers must explain an apparent contradiction between her 1989 support for a constitutional amendment banning most abortions and the 1993 speech in which she suggested a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy was a matter of ``self-determination.''

Miers's 1993 speech ``raises questions about how consistent and well-grounded her judicial philosophy might be,'' said Louisiana Republican David Vitter, who met with Miers today in Washington.

Vitter is among a half-dozen conservative Republicans who have questioned whether Miers's qualifications and judicial philosophy make her the best nominee at a time when President George W. Bush has an opportunity to cement conservative control of the Supreme Court.

Senate Judiciary Committee hearings are set to begin Nov. 7 on Miers's nomination to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a pivotal vote on many hot-button issues who voted to uphold abortion rights. Miers today is to resubmit written answers to questions that some lawmakers said she failed to answer completely the first time.

Miers must explain the 1993 speech to the committee ``because it would suggest at least she's got some opinions that don't necessarily jive,'' said South Dakota Republican John Thune.

`High Hill to Climb'

Conservative Senate Republicans have so far been the most vocal critics of Miers, 60, the White House counsel and a former Dallas lawyer who specialized in commercial litigation. Conservative groups opposing the nomination argue that because Miers was never a judge, she has no track record on issues likely to be decided by the court.

``I think she has a high hill to climb,'' said Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2008. ``The big question mark about this candidate is about the judicial philosophy, how set it is, what it is,'' he said.

Vitter said that when he asked Miers about the 1993 speech ``she tried to put it in context'' by saying ``she thought some of the analysis of particular snippets, statements from her past, was sort of over-analysis.''

In meetings with Democratic senators, Miers has said that a questionnaire she completed in 1989 to persuade an anti-abortion group to endorse her candidacy for the Dallas City Council shouldn't be interpreted as indicating whether she would overturn the Supreme Court's 1973 decision legalizing abortion. In that questionnaire, she said she would support an anti-abortion constitutional amendment.

Texans United for Life

Her supporters, meantime, have cited the Texans United For Life questionnaire to conservatives as evidence that her appointment fulfills Bush's campaign promise to appoint justices in the mold of Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, who voted against abortion rights and affirmative action.

In the 1993 speech to a Dallas group of women business executives, Miers spoke of ``the ongoing debate'' about ``the attempt to once again criminalize abortions or to once and for all guarantee the freedom of the individual women's right to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion,'' according to a text furnished to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In the speech, Miers said that ``legislating religion or morality we gave up on a long time ago.'' She said that when thinking about law and religion, ``the more self-determination makes the most sense.''

Brownback, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said, ``We need to know what she meant by those statements. We will have to inquire.''

`Activist Judiciary'

Besides her comments about abortion, Brownback said he was concerned about Miers's statements that courts have been forced to solve social problems because legislators have abdicated their responsibility.

``The philosophy that it seems to express about a more activist judiciary'' is at odds with ``some of the core of the things I have been most concerned about,'' Brownback told reporters.

Brownback and Vitter both said they were anxious to see written evidence of policy positions that Miers has taken during her five years as a presidential aide.

Such policy statements would help provide ``written objective evidence from before the nomination'' of her judicial philosophy, Vitter said. Bush has said he wouldn't release any documents revealing confidential advice to him.

In a letter to Miers, Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said he would ask the nominee about her views on presidential power ``especially in light of your close relationship with the president and the key positions you have held at the White House.''

Among other things, Specter said he would ask Miers if there were ``any limitations'' on how long the U.S. government could hold detainees seized in the war on terror and whether the Congress has the exclusive constitutional authority to declare war.

To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: October 26, 2005 14:24 EDT