University of Virginia Library

(55-45 Tally

Republicans Defect, Defeat Haynsworth

News Analysis

By Rod MacDonald
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Refusing to buckle under strong
administration pressures, 17 of the U.S.
Senate's Republicans deserted their President
Friday afternoon to reject the
nomination of Clement Haynsworth to
the U.S. Supreme Court.

The stinging defeat for the President
came about 55-45 when 38 Democrats,
led by Birch Bayh of Indiana, joined the
17 Republicans led by Minority Leader
Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania and Whip
Robert Griffin of Michigan to reject the
appointment.

The Senate had been considering the
nomination for the past three months,
during which several charges were made
the Judge Haynsworth, while Chief Judge
of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, had ruled on cases that affected
his own finances.

The nominee, who was the first
Supreme Court appointee since 1930 to
be refused by the Senate, would have
taken over the seat left vacant when
Justice Abe Fortas resigned last year
under similar pressures from ethics
minded senators.

Senator Griffin, in particular, had led
the fight against Justice Fortas when that
Justice was nominated for Chief Justice,
and the ensuing fight led to Mr. Fortas'
resignation.

He was one of the few senators to
remain consistent, however, as many
liberals who had supported Mr. Fortas
voted against Mr. Haynsworth, and
several conservatives (notably Strom
Thurmond and Ernest Hollings of South
Carolina) who had figured largely in the
attack on Mr. Fortas came to the defense
of Judge Haynsworth.

The loss was also seen as a defeat for
the President's "Southern Strategy," by
which the President would appoint a
conservative southerner to the Court.
While many senators who defended the
Judge said he should not be-considered
for his philosophy, President Nixon and
others had originally picked Mr. Haynsworth
because "The Supreme Court
needs men of his legal philosophy to
restore balance to that great institution."
Mr. Nixon also reiterated that quotation
after the Senate vote.

'Unimpeachable'

Senator Jacob Javits (R-N.Y.) noted,
however, that in selecting his next
appointee he hoped Mr. Nixon would
pick a man of "Unimpeachable character
and conduct and whose judicial and
constitutional philosophy - although it
need not be the same as mine will not
seek to wrench the Supreme Court out of
the context of contemporary history."

GOP Leader Scott, who remained
uncommitted until the final vote, cited
"ethical sensitivity" as his reason for
voting against confirmation. He deplored
the lack of public confidence he said
would result from placing Mr. Haynsworth
on the court, although he recommended
that the President select another
Southerner for a replacement, one with a
more ethical appearance.

The various objections to the nominee
culminated in the President's first big
defeat in Congress. It had looked like
another ABM vote, which passed after a
controversial debate by virtue of Vice-President
Angew's tie-breaking vote.

The decision was reached on a largely
bipartisan basis, despite efforts by the
administration to hold a tight Republican
line and win the Southern Democrats into
a Senate "southern strategy." Several
senators reported they were subjected to
"undue pressure," notably Mark Hatfield
of Oregon, who said business leaders who
supported his 1966 election had threatened
to dump him when his term is up if
he voted against confirmation.

Mr. Haynsworth's sponsor, Senator
Hollings, thus charged the Republican
leadership with scattering "like a covey of
quail" to the opponents' side. Senator
Hollings, a Democrat, had also crossed
party lines to support the appointment.

In many ways the administration, led
by Attorney General John Mitchell, had
tried to make the test (for Republicans at
least) one of Presidential loyalty. The
defection of the liberal GOP Senators,
however, was enough to defeat that
strategy.

Repercussions

It will take some time to assess the
repercussions in home states, although
most senators voted as their constituencies
might have expected anyway.
Virginia's Senators Harry Byrd and
William Spong both voted for confirmation
less than a month after the state
elected the President's candidate for
governor, Linwood Holton.

Other southerners kept the vote
divided on regional and ideological lines,
such as Democrat J. William Fulbright of
Arkansas, a fairly consistent opponent of
the President on military matters, who
joined 17 other Southern Democrats and
only one northern Democrat - Mike
Gravel of Alaska - in backing the
nomination. The 26 Republicans were
nearly all from the South, Midwest, or
Far West.

Southern Opposition

The only two Southerners - both
Democrats to oppose the nomination
were Ralph Yarborough of Texas and
Albert Gore of Tennessee, who also
opposed the ABM. Senator Gore, up for
re-election next year against Republican
Congressman William Brock, said "I
thought it would be a very serious
precedent to place on the Court someone
who sat on cases in which he had an
interest." He added he hoped another
Southerner would be named by the
President.

Regional Drum

Beating the regional drum. Rep.
Brock, who could not vote but backed
the nomination, said "It is unfortunate
that Senator Gore chose to join in the
attack on this outstanding Southern
jurist."

Of the seven uncommitted senators
when the 1 p.m. vote was begun, all but
six Mr. Fulbright being the exception -
voted against confirmation.

The President, who had refused to let
Mr. Haynsworth resign under fire or to
withdraw the bid, said he "deplored the
attacks upon this distinguished man." He
said he would wait until next year to
submit the name of a replacement.

In his home state, Judge Haynsworth
said he would consider retiring from the
Circuit Court if "my usefulness has been
impaired." The President has wired him
to stay on.