Advise and Dissent

(2 of 4)

The hearings will be only the first phase of the proceedings. Biden says the Judiciary Committee will make its determination -- favorable, unfavorable, no recommendation -- but will vote the matter out to the full Senate for consideration next month, even if a majority of the committee ends up opposing Bork. If, however, Bork is given an unfavorable report, Biden says, "I would hope the President would withdraw the nomination and send up another name. If Bork cannot convince the committee, then he probably would lose a vote on the floor as well." Given the stakes involved, Reagan is sure to ignore such advice, especially if the committee vote is close. The full Senate now seems about evenly split on the issue, with 30 or so Senators genuinely undecided.

Those fence sitters have been the targets of one of the most aggressive congressional lobbying drives in recent memory. "I've never seen this intensity for a campaign before," says Ralph Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the umbrella organization coordinating the anti-Bork juggernaut. "People are looking at this as all our previous battles wrapped into one." Says Tom Korologos, a noted Republican lobbyist retained by the White House to fight for Bork: "Rarely have I seen both left and right so vehement in their zeal."

The left, in particular, has waged its fight with an almost palpable sense of vengeance. Some liberals want to make up for their leadership's rather lax opposition to the promotion of William Rehnquist to Chief Justice and the appointment of conservative Antonin Scalia to the court last year. Moreover, with only 16 months remaining in the Reagan Administration, the Bork issue has become a device to galvanize and unify the disparate interest groups on the left. Neas is overseeing a "megacoalition" of prominent liberal organizations, including the N.A.A.C.P., Common Cause, People for the American Way, the National Organization for Women and the National Abortion Rights Action League. The coalition has published a half-dozen scholarly analyses of Bork's record and coordinated demonstrations against the nomination around the country.

Last month the American Civil Liberties Union formally called for Bork's rejection. The only other court nominee the A.C.L.U. has officially opposed was Rehnquist in 1971. Earlier in August, the AFL-CIO came out against Bork, citing his "overriding commitment to the interests of the wealthy and powerful."

The most surprising blow to Bork was dealt by the American Bar Association, which damned him with divided praise. Though the A.B.A.'s committee voted to grant Bork its highest rating, "well qualified," four of the 15 members felt that the judge was "not qualified." Given that the A.B.A. has unanimously approved the vast majority of court nominees over the past three decades, the number of dissents was striking. While most critics have attacked Bork on ideological grounds, the A.B.A. dissenters were not supposed to have even considered the judge's political philosophy. According to the committee's official guidelines, members must judge nominees solely on "professional qualifications -- competence, integrity and judicial temperament."