Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Replacing Rehnquist will likely mean fight

With a spot on the Supreme Court in the balance, both sides are already girding for battle.

By BILL ADAIR and WES ALLISON
Published June 29, 2005

	[AP photo]
	Chief Justice William Rehnquist's thyroid cancer has caused speculation to swirl.

WASHINGTON - No one has seen any resignation letters from the U.S. Supreme Court.

But in the war room at the liberal People for the American Way, they're primed to fight. The phones are hooked up, the computers are humming. Press releases and talking points for every eventuality are ready to go.

At the same time, conservative strategists in places such as Orlando and Omaha, Neb., are sharing e-mail lists, raising money, and targeting senators.

In the acidic climate of American politics, with the battle lines drawn, interest groups on the left and right are gearing up for what could be the biggest fight of President Bush's second term: the expected retirement of ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist and the confirmation battle over the first Supreme Court nominee in 11 years.

Speculation about Rehnquist's retirement and his potential replacement peaked this week as the Supreme Court ended its term on Monday. The 80-year-old chief justice, who has thyroid cancer, could resign any time, or not at all.

But the end of the term added a new sense of urgency to groups hoping to sway the outcome when the U.S. Senate begins hearings on the next nominee.

Conservatives are still smarting from the defeat of Reagan nominee Robert Bork in 1987 and the thrashing Democrats gave to Clarence Thomas a few years later. This battle is sure to be larger and just as bitter.

Progress for America, a conservative advocacy group with close ties to the White House, began running ads last week, and it has set aside $18-million to work on behalf of the president's choice.

"One of the things we've clearly learned from the past is that the other side has been better organized, so this time there's been an understanding of the need to help promote and defend the nominee," said Brian McCabe, president of Progress for America.

"People have been planning and talking about it for a long time."

Pouncing quickly

Sounding like a commander on the brink of war, Ralph Neas, president of PFAW, a liberal group likely to oppose any nominee, says a partisan battle is not a certainty.

He wants Bush to consult with both parties in the Senate before making a choice and says PFAW and other liberal groups could support a "traditional mainstream conservative" such as Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

But Neas says Bush's prior judicial appointees have been so conservative that it is unlikely he'll pick someone acceptable to PFAW.

"He's chosen confrontation over collaboration almost every single time," said Neas.

If Rehnquist retires, PFAW will mobilize quickly.

"We certainly know how important it is to frame the debate in that first news cycle," said Neas.

PFAW is part of a coalition of left-leaning groups ready to launch a full-fledged campaign against the nominee. The coalition includes labor unions, the Sierra Club, the MoveOn political action committee, NARAL Pro-Choice America and the National Organization for Women.

"We have a terrible suspicion he is going to pick the most extreme ideologue that he can find," said David Bookbinder, senior attorney for the Sierra Club.

The coalition has been holding weekly meetings and exchanging e-mails about strategy. Neas says the coalition includes "a team of battle-tested veterans" from the fights over Thomas and Bork.

They have enlisted Democratic consultants such as former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart and Carter Eskew to prepare TV ads and advise them on strategy. Neas says that his group was successful at moving public opinion during the battle over the filibuster in the Senate and that he plans to use similar techniques again.

Any nominee must be confirmed by the Senate. The Republicans have a hardy majority, but the Democrats, with 44 members, still have enough votes to filibuster, effectively blocking the president's nominee.

Conservatives' response

Conservatives hope to convince enough Democratic senators in Republican-leaning states, such as Bill Nelson of Florida, that such a move would be politically unwise.

The Florida Judicial Confirmation Network has been recruiting conservative organizations from around the state since late April, trading e-mail lists and developing a public relations and voter education plan to build public support for the eventual nominee.

John Dowless, a Republican political consultant and the group's executive director, said the regular conference calls and e-mail swaps include representatives from the Associated Industries of Florida, Christian Coalition to the Federalist Society, as well as a few conservative Democrats.

"What we're trying to offer is the grass roots, the community leaders, and put actual leaders' names and faces to supporting a particular nominee," Dowless said.

Last week, Progress for America launched a 10-day, $700,000 advertising campaign on cable news stations in Washington, D.C., as well as nationally on Fox News and CNN.

Titled "Get Ready," the 30-second spot accuses Democrats of running a smear campaign against the president's nominees to lower courts and of being obstructionists.

Progress for America says it's also working with other conservative groups. As Progress for America buys TV and radio ads, other groups, such as the Federalist Society, will reinforce the ads with appearances by prominent conservatives, such as former Attorney General Edwin Meese III.

Conservatives say they believe they recently won a boost from one of the court's last rulings of the term, which allows cities to condemn homes to make way for private projects, such as condominiums or shopping malls.

By a 5-4 vote, the court's liberal members carried the decision. Conservative activists hope that will boost the public's desire for more conservative judges.

"Everybody gets this viscerally, homeowner or not, and this issue is going to be used ... going forward in the judicial nominations battle, and it's going to be good for the right," said Sean Rushton, executive director of the Committee for Justice, a conservative nonprofit organization that works toward the confirmation of Bush's nominees.

A strategic mistake?

Some political analysts say the liberal groups would make a strategic mistake by fighting Rehnquist's replacement. The analysts say Rehnquist has been one of the court's most conservative justices, so if Bush nominates another conservative, there would be no change in how the court votes.

Chuck Todd, editor of the political Web site Hotline, said the liberal activists "are going to want to fight anybody. But the fact is, the replacement of Rehnquist is no change" in the makeup of the court.

"Everybody is too geared up for warfare. But it's politically stupid. There is nothing to gain."

By fighting a Rehnquist replacement, the Democrats can be labeled obstructionists, he said. That could hurt their credibility for a more important battle: the replacement for a moderate justice such as O'Connor.

Behind the scenes, the liberal groups have disagreed about strategy. Some want to fight any nominee. Others may opt out of the fight if Bush picks someone acceptable. The Sierra Club, for example, has not opposed some of Bush's judicial nominees because they've had good environmental records.

But the early signs indicate most groups will fight. Tom Matzzie, Washington director of the MoveOn PAC, equated it with exercise.

"We grow stronger and bigger with every campaign we fight."

[Last modified June 29, 2005, 11:20:24]