Susan Walsh, Associated Press
	President Bush looks on as John Roberts is sworn in by Justice John Paul Stevens as 17th Chief Justice of the United States in the East Room of the White House yesterday. Roberts' wife Jane holds the Bible.

WASHINGTON -- The Senate overwhelmingly confirmed Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court yesterday with a vote of 78-22. Just hours later at the White House, he was sworn in as the nation's 17th chief justice.

As his family, the current justices of the Supreme Court and top administration officials looked on, Justice John Paul Stevens swore in the 50-year old Roberts, who stood with his wife at his side and his hand on his family's bible.

In brief remarks after taking the oath, the new chief justice said he viewed the Senate's vote yesterday morning "as confirmation of what is for me a bedrock principle, that judging is different from politics."

Roberts had watched the Senate vote yesterday morning in the Roosevelt Room with President Bush and former Sen. Fred Thompson, who had guided Roberts through the confirmation process.

To underscore the solemnity and importance of the occasion across town in the Senate chamber, nearly all of the 100 senators took their seats before the vote and rose when their names were called to formally give their vote. Just a handful of senators -- including Massachusetts Democrat John F. Kerry-- drifted in late.

Under heavy criticism from Democratic interest groups, half of the Senate's 44 Democrats, and its lone independent Sen. James A. Jeffords of Vermont, joined the chamber's 55 Republicans in voting for Roberts to succeed William H. Rehnquist. The vote delivered a much-needed victory for Bush, but was also clearly intended to bolster Democrats' political capital if they decide to oppose the next nominee.

There was little suspense in the final tally as many senators had previously announced their decisions. The Democrats' attention has for some time been focused on whom Bush will nominate to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, which he may do as early as today.

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a member of the Democratic leadership, warned yesterday if the president puts forward a nominee the party considers to be outside the "conservative mainstream," their option to block that person with the procedural move known as the filibuster is still very much in play.

Many Democrats said their 22-22 split vote yesterday was a signal to Bush that it would be wise to pick another "consensus nominee" to replace O'Connor, who has been the court's swing vote in many of the Supreme Court's 5-4 decisions in recent years.

"I think we've demonstrated that we can be bipartisan here," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, the Judiciary Committee's ranking member and one of the Democrats to vote for Roberts.

Schumer fought off speculation that the division among Democrats had shown weakness, "We all voted our conscience," Schumer said. "Democrats are not lined up as a unit to try and block every nominee."

"But if [the president's next candidate] is a nominee who is considerably out of the mainstream, we'll have no choice but to try and block that nominee on the floor," Schumer said.

A number of Democrats also argued yesterday that their party's position on the next nominee has been strengthened by the Republican Party's troubles -- from the president's low approval ratings for his handling of Hurricane Katrina and the Iraq War to the indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay Wednesday.

Judiciary Chairman Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said it was his "hope that the president will now send us a nominee for Justice O'Connor's spot in the mold of Judge Roberts." Specter said the 78-vote consensus on Roberts was "remarkable" after the contentiousness shown in the Senate earlier this year.

Those tensions stemmed primarily from the Democrats' decision to block 10 of the president's nominees last session, which led to a showdown earlier this year. Republican leaders threatened to change the rules to strip Democrats of their power to use the filibuster.

But at the last moment, seven Republicans and seven Democrats banded together to prevent the rule change proposed by Republican leaders.

Under the agreement, seven Democrats agreed not to block any nominee except in "extraordinary circumstances."

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-S.C., one of the Republican members of the group, cautioned that if Democrats tried to block Bush's next nominee, Republicans could back out of their end of the deal as well.

Washington was engaged in a frenzy of speculation about the next nominee yesterday afternoon after press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters that White House officials have consulted with more than 70 senators about the next nominee and that the process "is essentially wrapping up at this point."

Democrats said they were most concerned that Bush would name one of the nominees they initially blocked, including D.C. Circuit Court Judge Janice Rogers Brown, 8th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Priscilla R. Owen, or 11th Circuit Court Judge William H. Pryor Jr.. Schumer said he thought any of those choices would provoke a filibuster.

There was also speculation yesterday about the fact that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- a close friend of the president's from Texas who has long been thought to be on Bush's "short list" of candidates -- was seated in a highly visible spot next to Vice President Dick Cheney at Roberts' swearing-in.

Leaders of several Democratic interest groups said yesterday that they were deeply disappointed that so many Democrats had defected to support Roberts, but they too were focused on the next nominee.