GOP scrutinizes nominee
Civil rights officer designation opposed
WASHINGTON (AP) —
President Clinton’s nomination of
Bill Lann Lee as the nation’s top civil
rights officer appeared in serious
trouble Tuesday after a key Senate
Republican criticized the Los
Angeles lawyer’s views on affirma
tive action.
Several other Republicans on the
Senate Judiciary Committee said
they also opposed Lee, casting fur
ther doubt over whether or not the
panel will approve the nomination
this week and forward it to the full
Senate for confirmation.
The White House, no stranger to
battles over President Clinton’s nomi
nees, said it had no plans to withdraw
the nomination. Officials arranged a
strategy meeting with civil rights
groups and accused the Senate of
playing political games with
Clinton’s appointments.
Judiciary Committee Chairman
Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told the Senate
that Lee’s devotion to “preserving
constitutionally suspect race-con
scious policies that ultimately sort
and divide citizens by race” made
him an unacceptable choice for the
post.
Hatch, along with other
Republicans and conservatives,
wants to end affirmative action and
opposed the administration’s position
in a case challenging California’s
Proposition 209, which recently was
upheld by a federal appeals court.
The Supreme Court declined
Monday to hear further appeals in the
case.
The Utah Republican also is the
sponsor of similar anti-affirmative
action legislation that would apply to
the federal government.
Lee, the Los Angeles-based coun
sel for the NAACP Legal Defense
and Educational Fund since 1988,
supported the administration’s argu
ments against Proposition 209 and
disagreed with the Supreme Court
ruling in 1995 in the much-watched
affirmative action case, Adarand vs.
Pech.
Hatch said Lee’s answers to ques
tions from the committee suggested
that his “understanding of the
nation’s civil rights laws is sufficient
ly cramped and distorted to compel*
my opposition.”
“The assistant attorney general
must be America’s civil rights law
enforcer, not the civil rights ombuds
man for the political left,” he said.
Clinton said he was disappointed
in Hatch because “everybody who
knows Bill Lann Lee knows he is
superbly qualified.” He added that
the White House would begin to
lobby senators for their support.
“How could anybody in good
conscience vote against him if they
believe our civil rights laws ought to
be enforced?” he said. “That is the
question we will be pressing to every
senator without regard to party.”
Senate Democratic leader Tom
Daschle of South Dakota said Hatch
did a “real disservice to Mr. Lee,” but
didn’t necessarily kill the nomina
tion.
“There are times when other
issues have been proclaimed dead
and we’ve been able to revive them,
and I’m hopeful we can do that with
the Lee nomination,” Daschle told
reporters.
Lee, a 48-year-old New York
native and son of Chinese immi
grants, would be the first Asian
American to hold the post if con
firmed by the full Senate.
Clinton hits had previous prob
lems with Congress over his choices
for this particular Justice Department
post. He was forced to withdraw Lani
Guinier, his first choice, in 1993
when faced with a GOP filibuster in
what then was a Democratic-con
trolled Congress. Republicans
opposed her views on affirmative
action and derided her as a “quota
queen.”
The Senate confirmed his second
choice, Boston attorney Deval
Patrick. He returned to private prac
tice this year after three years in the
post.
Others nominees who have
encountered Republican resistance
include Labor Secretary Alexis
Herman, Transportation Secretary
Rodney Slater, Dr. David Satcher, the
surgeon general nominee, and Nancy
Ann Min DeParlet the nominee to
become administrator of the Health
Care Finance Agency.
But all of Clinton’s choices for the
civil rights post share a bond —
employment by the NAACP Legal
Defense and Educational Fund,
which is disliked by conservatives for .
its staunch defense of affirmative
action.
“We’re gratified that Senator
Hatch is standing up for the principle
of equality under the law and oppos
ing the nomination,” said Clint
Bolick, vice president for litigation at
the Institute for Justice, a conserva
tive group that opposes Lee. “We feel
confident that if the administration
persists with this nomination it will
be defeated.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee
planned to vote Thursday on Lee’s
nomination, which needs at least 10
votes to get to the Senate floor. Lee
was believed to have the panel’s eight
Democrats on his side, but six of its
10 Republicans said they were
inclined to or would vote ‘no.’
A White House official, speaking
on condition of anonymity, said two
other senators — Charles Grassley of
Iowa and Fred Thompson of
Tennessee — could provide the
Republican votes needed to move the
nomination forward. Both declined to
comment Tuesday when asked how
they would vote.
Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., the
assistant Senate majority leader, said:
“I don’t think he ’ll get out of the com
mittee but if he does I don’t think
he’ll be confirmed.”
Some of Lee’s supporters said he
was being unfairly held to a standard
that requires him to disagree with the
president who nominated him. He
also has support among some
Republicans, including Los Angeles
Mayor Richard Riordan and Sen.
Alfonse D’Amato of New York.
Court fends off challengers
(U-WIRE) BERKELEY, Calif,
v-Despite the decision Monday by the
U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the
constitutionality of Proposition 209
-officially making it a law - oppo
nents say they will continue to chal
lenge its implementation.
Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court
refused to grant a review of the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals deci
sion, which earlier this year deemed
Proposition 209, which bans race and
gender preferences in state hiring
practices, constitutional.
The move concluded a yearlong
legal battle that began after last
November’s elections, in which
California voters approved
Proposition 209.
The ACLUs of both Northern and
Southern California, along with a
coalition of civil rights groups, filed
an initial lawsuit to block the imple
mentation of the proposition on Nov.
6,1996, the day after the elections.
A series of legal decisions on the
case followed. On Dec. 23, 1996, a
U.S. District judge issued a prelimi
nary injunction which barred state
and local governments from enforc
ing the measure.
But after proponents of
Proposition 209 appealed to the 9th
Circuit, a three-judge panel decided
on April 8,1997 to reverse the district
court decision and rule the proposi
tion constitutional.
Upon hearing Monday’s decision,
many affirmative action supporters
said that they will continue to chal
lenge the legal status of Proposition
209 and any similar legislation.
“The denial of the review is riot
the same thing as an actual decision
on whether Proposition 209 is consti
tutional," said Mark Rosenbaum, who
led the prosecution against the propo
sition. "The question can and will be
raised again in national court."
Yet opponents of affirmative action
disagreed, saying that the Supreme
Court’s decision put the issue of the
proposition’s legality at rest.
"We are elated that this issue is
finally being put to rest and the will
of the people will finally be a voice in
this state," said Ann Gonzalez
Kramer, a member of the American
Civil Rights Institute. "The Supreme
Court has ruled indirectly on the
proposition’s constitutionality."
Though members of the prosecu
tion’s legal counsel said they did not
know why the Supreme Court denied
their petition to review the 9th
Circuit’s decision, some speculated
that the justices would rather look at
the case in another format.
"No other law in the nation’s histo
ry has stripped the government of
authority to implement remedial race
and gender programs," said Edward
Chen, a staff attorney for the ACLUof
Southern California. "It is conceivable
-r
that the court decided not to hear the
case because it is waiting for a split of
authority between courts of appeal.
"The state argued that the court
should not hear the case at this early
stage but should instead wait for a
case regarding the applicability of
209 to a particular program," Chen
added.
Opponents of the proposition said
they would combat any forthcoming
efforts to eliminate race and gender
specific programs.
"Our organization will be moni
toring cities and counties to be sure
that Proposition 209 is implement-^ '
ed," Gonzales-Kramer said. "Those
that do not (implement the law) will
be taken to court."
But affirmative action-supporters
said they would fight such measures.
"The struggle to break down the
barriers facing minorities and women
will continue," said Oren Sillstrom, a
staff attorney for the Lawyers
Committee for Civil Rights, which
aided the prosecution. "We certainly
plan to help promote and defend
affirmative action, and if particular
programs are challenged, we will
assist in defending them."
«
We are elated that this issue is finally
being put to rest and the will of the people
will finally be a voice in this state”
Ann Gonzalez-Kramer
member of the American Civil Rights Institute
• Fall semester in Tokyo, Japan
• 17 credit hours
• Japanese business, language,
and culture
• Tour multinational
corporations such as Sony,
Nissan, SC Coca Cola
• Interested? Join us V
Thursday, Nov, 6 from 9~wam
in the CBA Atrium and watch the DN Classifieds for dates
of upcoming information sessions!
Comae* O'*** Bt»! or Erica League, CBA 138, 472*2710, < eteague^dtamaft.uitf.edu >
We're More Than You Think!
Confidential & Affordable Reproductive Health Care
j I Planned Parenthood®
v L " of Lincoln
2246 ‘O’ Street 441-3300 • 3705 South Street 441-3333
I-1
Good Luck
on the CPA Exam!
from
the Omaha Staff of the
BECK ten
A Division of DeVry Inc.™
With more than 215,000 CPA
Alumni who prepared to succeed.
1 -800-370-9872
*>
, \
i
jgfe,
’
■ ' .’.“ ~ ' ‘ ■" . '■ -
\
. • • '"r>