Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Summer of mudslinging

The confirmation process for Sandra Day O'Connor's successor shouldn't degenerate into character assassination, but it will.

They already are shouting so loudly they can't hear anyone but themselves, so they aren't likely to pause long enough to listen. But the interest groups fighting over Sandra Day O'Connor's successor on the U.S. Supreme Court should pipe down. The battle over President Bush's first nominee to the court already is shaping up to be the noisiest, nastiest and most expensive ever - and the president hasn't even announced his choice yet. U.S. Supreme Court nominees should be evaluated on their record, temperament and scholarship; who screams the loudest or sends the most e-mails is irrelevant.

The battles over Robert Bork in 1987 and Clarence Thomas in 1991 were unnecessarily ugly, but this one figures to be worse. O'Connor has often cast the decisive swing vote, so there is added pressure from conservatives to push the court further to the right and from liberals desperate to maintain the status quo. This also is the first Supreme Court fight in the age of the full-fledged Internet, with instant e-mails, fundraising at the click of a mouse and countless bloggers. The nominee can expect to have his character assassinated, his record distorted and his motives questioned before the first Senate confirmation hearing.

The hyperventilating is evident on both sides. From the left, the MoveOn political action committee is airing ads asking whether Bush will select "an extremist who will threaten our rights." People for the American Way also expects to raise millions and is organizing a network of partisans willing to make telephone calls at a moment's notice to "senators, the media and other targets."

From the right, Progress for America, the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family are mounting sophisticated grass-roots efforts. The conservative groups actually are fighting on two fronts: They back Bush against the left-leaning groups but warn the president not to nominate U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales because they don't consider him reliably conservative. Bush finds himself in an awkward spot, because just picking a conservative isn't enough for the hard-core conservative groups who backed his re-election.

The confirmation process for a seat on the highest court in the land should not degenerate into a destructive mudslinging contest. In an ideal world, the president would select wisely, the Senate would thoroughly vet the appointee in dignified hearings before voting on confirmation, and the interest groups on both sides would stop thumping their chests and filling their bank accounts. In the real world, it promises to be a long, loud summer.

[Last modified July 6, 2005, 00:49:15]