President Bush could have done a lot of things with his nominee to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court.

He could have sought a name that would inflame Democrats and engage the religious right. He could have sought a moderate in the mold of O’Connor. Or he could have nominated his friend and attorney general, Alberto Gonzales. He could have chosen a woman or a minority.

Instead, he chose a nominee who might be confirmed without tearing the Senate and the country apart.

The nominee, Judge John G. Roberts Jr., is a white man and Harvard graduate with a short tenure on the federal bench and a reputation as one of the leading minds in appellate law. Roberts has impeccable conservative credentials. He was a clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, worked with Ken Starr and is a member of the Federalist Society.

But he is not a fire-breather spewing rhetoric or advocating ideology from the bench, and he is regarded as a serious and thoughtful jurist who has a good chance of winning confirmation with the support of some Democratic senators. He’s a Washington insider and an establishment nominee, not a judicial revolutionary, according to most accounts.

Some on the left and supporters of abortion rights will find reason to object to Roberts. During his time in the administration of President George H.W. Bush, he argued that Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that established the right to reproductive privacy, should be overturned.

Whether the argument represented his own views or those of the first Bush administration isn’t clear. There’s not much evidence so far one way or the other, which could also cause concern among Republicans worried about the appointment of a stealth moderate.

He has also ruled in a way that suggests he would restrict the application of the Commerce Clause and place new limits upon federal authority.

His short time on the federal bench has created a thin public record of his tendencies as a jurist. As the Senate takes up his confirmation, we would expect a measured and thorough examination of his ideas and actions. In the past, the president has said he would appoint a justice in the model of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. It’s a fair question to ask whether Roberts fits that bill or if, instead, he represents more mainstream conservative thinking.

There was never a serious question that the president would nominate a conservative for the Supreme Court. If confirmed, Roberts would certainly move the court to the right. But Bush deserves credit for a choice with impressive legal credentials who does not needlessly inflame partisan divisions.