Dems Eye Alito Role In 2002 Case

Nominee's Handling Of Mutual Fund Case Raising Questions

(CBS/AP) 
Additionally, several lawmakers of both parties who helped defuse a showdown over Mr. Bush's conservative appeals court nominees last spring have signaled they will be unsympathetic to a filibuster should liberal opponents seek to prevent a final vote.

Democrats from Republican-leaning states have praised Alito without endorsing him. "I found him to be very impressive, I found him to be a very thoughtful person," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. "... Absolutely he is conservative, but I believe in the broad mainstream of American jurisprudence," he added.

The Judiciary Committee has scheduled hearings for Alito beginning Jan. 9, and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the panel's chairman, has said he hopes for a final vote by the full Senate on Jan. 20. That would come two days before the anniversary of the 1973 ruling that established abortion rights — Roe v. Wade — the decision many conservatives hope Alito will overturn if confirmed for the seat held by O'Connor.

O'Connor's vote has been pivotal on the court on abortion, affirmative action and other issues, and partisans on both ends of the political spectrum say that elevates the importance of Alito's nomination.

Alito reported holdings of about $80,000 in Vanguard funds when he was confirmed in 1990 to the appeals court seat, and news articles around the time of the disputed case placed his investment at $390,000 or above.

Schmidt, the White House spokesman, pointed to letters by two law professors who wrote Specter earlier this month, saying Alito had handled the 2002 case properly.

At the same time, the Republican National Committee circulated material criticizing Sen. Edward M. Kennedy for challenging Alito's behavior in the 2002 case — then praised the Massachusetts Democrat for defending Justice Stephen Breyer against conflict-of-interest allegations at his 1994 confirmation hearings.

Kennedy wrote Alito on Tuesday, posing a series of questions about the case and noting his 1990 pledge to the Judiciary Committee.

The letter by the committee's eight Democrats, addressed to Anthony J. Scirica, chief judge of the 3rd U.S. circuit court of appeals, escalated the issue.

Based on Kennedy's letter as well as the one issued to the appeals court, there seems to be little controversy about the ruling in the Vanguard-related case, in which the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the decision made by Alito and two other appeals court judges.

Instead, the Democrats turned their attention to the 1990 pledge to the Judiciary Committee and his decision not to disqualify himself.

In the 2002 case, Shantee Maharaj sought a rehearing after learning Alito held investments in Vanguard, and she sought to erase the ruling and disqualify him from further proceedings.

Alito wrote a letter to the chief judge saying he did not believe he was required to disqualify himself on the basis of ownership of shares in a mutual fund. At the same time, he was voluntarily recusing himself from a decision on whether to wipe out the original ruling. He did not mention the pledge he had made to the Senate.