Alito assailed on ‘1 man, 1 vote’

Democrats continued their attack yesterday on Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., accusing the Supreme Court nominee of being opposed to the proposition of “one man, one vote.”

Sen. Barbara Boxer, California Democrat, said Judge Alito faces opposition over his decisions and an array of positions and statements on issues such as abortion that he made as a Reagan administration attorney in the 1980s.

“But even more serious for many people — many people — is the fact that he opposed the ‘one person, one vote’” decisions on drawing legislative districts, she said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Asked whether she would support a filibuster of his nomination, Mrs. Boxer replied, “Everything’s on the table, because the rights, freedoms and liberties of your viewers and my constituents are on the line.”

In a 1985 job application, first reported last month by The Washington Times, Judge Alito said his interest as a young man in constitutional law was “motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of … reapportionment.”

Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and member of the Judiciary Committee, dismissed the comments. He said the 22 Democrats who voted against the nomination earlier this year of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. have no credibility to critique Judge Alito.

“It should come as no surprise that the Senate Democrats who voted against the nomination of Chief Justice Roberts are now attempting to justify their ‘no’ vote against Judge Alito — a month before a hearing has even been held — by mischaracterizing his judicial record,” he said. “If they couldn’t vote for Chief Justice Roberts, the hard left certainly won’t support any of President Bush’s nominations to the Supreme Court.”

Brian Jones, communications director of the Republican National Committee, called Mrs. Boxer’s charge a “blatant lie.”

He pointed to comments by Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter on Friday in which Judge Alito had assured him that he supports the proposition that every American should have equal representation in Congress.

Judge Alito “thinks that ‘one man, one vote’ is very deeply embedded, is really a principle, which is settled and beyond attack,” Mr. Specter said after meeting with him.

Mr. Jones said Democrats are distorting Judge Alito’s record and statements.

“Every time the Democrats desperately attempt to misrepresent Judge Alito’s record, they undermine their own credibility when it comes to the nomination,” he said.

Reapportionment refers to a string of cases growing out of the 1962 Supreme Court decision in Baker v. Carr, in which the high court for the first time declared that states’ legislative districts could be challenged in federal court.

Until then, congressional districts had varied greatly in population, thus giving more weight to voters in districts with smaller populations. Legislative districts since have been drawn meticulously after each decennial census to have equal populations.