Dems face power struggle for top judiciary job
WASHINGTON >> As soon as Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois learned officially Monday that there would be a Democratic opening at the top of the Judiciary Committee, he was on the phone to his colleagues trying to nail down their support for the position.
“Never take anything for granted,” Durbin said of his bid to replace Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, who stepped aside as the senior Democrat on the panel under intense pressure from progressive activists who deemed her insufficiently aggressive for the job. “I have been through these contests before.”
One fellow Democrat whom Durbin did not talk to was Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who made clear by the next afternoon that he was also interested in the job. Some of the same progressive activists who pressed to shove Feinstein aside said they would be backing him.
The competition set up a rare internal power struggle that reflected broader disputes among Democrats over the direction and approach of their party in a new Congress. As they sort through the results of the election, which handed them control of the White House but left their hopes of taking the Senate hanging by a thread, some are pushing for a new, more combative style and generational change.
Depending on the results of two Senate runoffs in Georgia in January, whoever wins the battle for the post will be either the chairman of the panel or the senior Democrat, with a crucial role to play on a panel that Republicans have turned into a judicial confirmation assembly line.
Durbin is the next in line behind Feinstein on the committee, and Democrats generally adhere to seniority when awarding such posts. The tension in this case partly comes from the fact that Durbin is already the No. 2 leader and holds an important subcommittee chairmanship on the Appropriations panel, which controls federal spending. To some, he is trying to hoard power, potentially at the expense of his own effectiveness in either job.
“Ultimately, this is not going to come down to policy considerations,” said Brian Fallon, the executive director of the progressive advocacy group Demand Justice and a backer of Whitehouse. “It will be about whether the caucus thinks a leadership post and the top spot on a major committee are too much for one member to hold simultaneously.”
Durbin said it was common for Senate leaders to hold a top job on a committee, and his office noted that the whip, the secondranking official, had routinely done so in the past. First elected to the Senate in 1996, Durbin, 76, who just won his fifth term, has never served as either the chairman or the senior minority member of a full committee. He said he saw this as his chance to influence the direction of a panel he has sat on for 22 years.
Members of both parties have viewed Durbin as an effective advocate for committee Democrats who have chafed at the way Republicans have jammed through nominees in recent years.
Supporters of Durbin noted his pursuit of progressive goals on a range of issues.
“Senator Durbin consistently has articulated progressive values at the heart of the Judiciary Committee’s ambit, ranging from checking corporate power through arbitration and bankruptcy reform to promoting fair elections to protecting whistleblowers and civil liberties,” said Daniel Schuman, the policy director at Demand Progress.
Under Republican control since 2015, the committee has been the focal point for that party’s drive to confirm more than 220 conservative federal judges, including three Supreme Court justices.
Against that backdrop, Whitehouse, 65, who declined to be interviewed for this article, has charted out how a network of advocacy groups has taken money from undisclosed donors to support the confirmation of conservative judges who are seen as potentially sympathetic to their interests.
His push has brought him support from those on the left who believe Democrats have not been aggressive enough in challenging Republicans over the judiciary.