The New War on Ashcroft
Patrick Leahy's latest strategy.

November 28, 2001 8:35 a.m.

oday Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy begins an intensive series of hearings designed to examine military tribunals, detention of suspects and witnesses, and other aspects of the Bush Justice Department's response to terrorism. But Republicans believe the hearings have a secondary purpose as well: to renew the attacks on Attorney General John Ashcroft that began during his confirmation hearings ten months ago.

Today's session, titled "Department of Justice Oversight: Preserving Our Freedoms While Defending Against Terrorism," ran into trouble even before it began. Although Leahy proposed to probe Justice Department policies, he did not schedule anyone from the Justice Department to testify. Last week, Assistant Attorney General Daniel Bryant wrote a letter to Leahy saying, "Given that the stated subject of the November 28 hearing is Department of Justice oversight, it is appropriate that a representative of the Justice Department be present as a witness." Bryant suggested criminal-division head Michael Chertoff, who, Bryant dryly added, "would be an excellent witness on issues related to Justice Department actions since September 11." Leahy added Chertoff to the list at virtually the last minute.

Leahy had originally made several requests for Ashcroft to testify. After putting the chairman off, the attorney general is scheduled to appear before the committee next week. Although his testimony will undoubtedly draw an enormous amount of press coverage, it will be just one of many committee sessions in coming weeks. Democrats have scheduled full committee hearings and subcommittee hearings on the war on terrorism at the rate of one, and sometimes two, sessions a day.

Although most Republican lawmakers approve of Bush administration policies, they also believe the Justice Department's actions in the war on terrorism are a legitimate area for congressional oversight. However, the sheer number of hearings, plus the involvement of a coalition of liberal interest groups that attacked Ashcroft at his confirmation hearings early this year, suggests, at least to the GOP, that Democrats are also interested in inflicting political damage on the attorney general.

The leader of one of those interest groups, Ralph Neas of People for the American Way, recently called Ashcroft "the most dangerous threat to civil liberties in the federal government," and accused the attorney general of waging a "relentless assault on constitutional rights and civil liberties." A report released this month by Neas's group says the Justice Department's antiterrorism policies "vindicate many of the fears expressed by civil rights and civil liberties organizations when John Ashcroft was first nominated for the position of U.S. attorney general. In fact, many of those fears had been vindicated even before September 11."

Republicans believe Leahy and other Democrats have chosen to concentrate their fire on Ashcroft as a way of scoring points against the Bush administration without appearing to attack the president, who enjoys high job approval ratings. For example, Republicans point out that the issue of military tribunals was a Bush executive order that will be carried out by the Defense Department. Why not go after the White House instead of focusing on Ashcroft? While that might be the more direct approach, at the moment even Neas seems inclined to exempt Bush from criticism. "The sense I get is that the president has focused primarily on what's going on overseas and has delegated what's going on domestically to the attorney general," he says.

Finally, some in the GOP believe another name for the flurry of Judiciary Committee activity might be "What We're Doing Instead Of Confirming Judges." There has been little if any progress on the issue of judges since the failure of a GOP plan to block appropriations bills as a way of forcing Democrats to consider more of the president's judicial nominations. Now, with no pressure to act, Leahy is virtually ignoring the issue. Will Republicans renew a push for more confirmations before the end of the year? "There's no point in it," says one frustrated aide.