Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York, one of the most outspoken Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, invoked the name of Rosa Parks, who died last week at age 92, in questioning Alito's commitment to civil rights.
"Like Rosa Parks, Judge Alito will be able to change history by virtue of where he sits," Schumer said. "The real question today is whether Judge Alito would use his seat on the bench, just as Rosa Parks used her seat on the bus, to change history for the better or whether he would use that seat to reverse much of what Rosa Parks and so many others fought so hard and for so long to put in place."
He called Alito's visit to pay respects to Parks "appropriate," but said his record "is much more important" and raises questions about his commitments to civil rights, workers' rights, women's rights and "the rights of average Americans." Schumer said it was "sad" that Bush chose "a nominee likely to divide America instead of choosing a nominee in the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor, who would unify us."
As for the timing of the hearings, Schumer said, "When there is a controversial nominee for a pivotal swing vote on the high court, the procedure should not be short-circuited, short-changed or rushed. We need to be careful here."
He refused to comment on the possibility that Democrats could try to block Alito through a filibuster. "Nothing is on the table, and nothing is off the table," he said. "Let's learn more about Judge Alito."
Frist indicated earlier that Republicans were prepared for a Senate fight over Alito, whom he called "a highly qualified nominee" with "impeccable" qualifications.
"If the Democrats look for a fight, we'll be there ready to fight," Frist said on the Fox News Channel. He said there would be "plenty of fodder for fights" in Alito's judicial record, "and we'll be ready to fight if we need to."
Frist added, "If it takes a fight on the floor of the United States Senate, people like Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are going to get that. The American people deserve fair up-or-down votes. . . . I hope it doesn't come to a filibuster. It should not; the American people deserve more."
The prospect of a filibuster raised the profile of the "Gang of 14," a group of seven Republicans and seven Democrats who broke with their parties in May to forge a compromise aimed at ensuring confirmation votes for three of Bush's appellate court nominees in return for shelving the "nuclear option." Under that option, the Republicans would have used a parliamentary maneuver to ban judicial filibusters by majority vote. The Democrats had vowed to retaliate by using Senate rules to bring most of the chamber's business to a halt.
The Gang of 14 played a crucial role because the Republicans hold 55 Senate seats, and 60 votes are required to end a filibuster. Under the compromise, the seven Democrats said they would not go along with Democratic filibusters of judicial nominees except in "extraordinary circumstances," a term that was left undefined.
There was no indication today whether any Democrats would invoke "extraordinary circumstances" to filibuster Alito.
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a leading Democratic member of the Gang of 14, said in a statement that "we should withhold judgment" until the hearings on Alito.
Sign Up for RSS Feed
