WASHINGTON — Civil-rights organizations are attempting to torpedo the nomination of Charles Pickering, a pro-life judge from Mississippi nominated by the White House to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

But others — including even The Washington Post and The New York Times — have suggested that the claims that Pickering is soft on civil rights are groundless. And many observers suspect the allegations are merely an excuse to allow pro-abortion Democrats on the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee to reject appointment of a pro-life judge.

Kweisi Mfume, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, insisted that Pickering's record made him unacceptable for advancement.

“We will continue to demand fairness on the part of those empowered to interpret the laws of our nation,” Mfume said in a statement to the Register.

Mfume added that Pickering's confirmation would force civil rights and equal protection of the law to take a “back seat to partisan politics and political affiliations.”

The NAACP has teamed up with other left-wing interest groups like People for the American Way, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League and the National Organization for Women to oppose Pickering's nomination. The organizations have issued press releases and made hundreds of phone calls encouraging other groups to denounce Pickering.

On civil rights, the anti-Pickering forces cite an article he wrote in 1959 as a law student suggesting amendments that might prevent a law prohibiting inter-racial marriage from being found unconstitutional. They also criticize his voting record as a state senator against redistricting proposals that would have favored black candidates.

But the Bush administration counters that Pickering's overall record as a lawyer, legislator and judge comprehensively refutes the charges of bias.

“Charles Pickering is extremely qualified,” said White House spokes-woman Mercedes Viana.

She said any attempt to taint Pickering as a racist can't hold up to the facts.

“He testified against the imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan back in 1967,” Viana said. Pickering served as county prosecutor at the time.

She also noted that Early Gray, whose son Pickering defended in a racially charged robbery case in 1981, supports his nomination. “The people who know him best, support his nomination,” said Viana. “He's dedicated his life to public service.”

Record of Reconciliation

The episodes cited by Viana were only two examples of Pickering's record of reconciliation, supporters say.

Pickering currently serves on the board of the Institute for Racial Reconciliation at the University of Mississippi. Prominent judge and former NAACP board member Henry Wingate joined Pickering on a lecture tour around Mississippi to promote racial harmony.

In a New York Times article, most blacks interviewed in rural Laurel, Miss., Pickering's home, said the judge was a champion of racial harmony.

“I can't believe the man they're describing in Washington is the same one I've known for years,” said Thaddeus Edmonson, a former local NAACP president. “If those people who are voting against him because of some press release would just come down here and talk to the people who know him, I think they would have a very different opinion.”

“I know Judge Pickering is a fair and impartial person grounded with Christian ethics and beliefs, who ought to be given this chance,” Rev. Arthur Logan, the black pastor of the Union Baptist Church and a city council member, told the Times.

Edwin Meese III, attorney general for President Reagan, told the Register the attacks against Pickering are ridiculous. Said Meese, “Judge Pickering is eminently qualified for elevation to the Court of Appeals. The delay in his confirmation and the false accusations being made constitute a potential blight on the Senate and indicate an attitude of unfair bias on the part of the Senate leadership.”

The Democrats' opposition clearly has a lot to do with Pickering's pro-life record. As a state legislator, Pickering supported a constitutional ban on abortion, and in 1976 he helped write the Republican Party's pro-life plank. NARAL President Kate Michelman cited that record in a Jan. 22 press release opposing Pickering's confirmation.

“Charles Pickering's nomination by President Bush is part of a continuing effort to hasten the reversal of Roe and the end of legal abortion,” Michelman said. “A lifetime appointment to the Court of Appeals for Charles Pickering may lead to a lifetime of disappointment and hardship for women seeking to exercise their constitutional right to choose. “

Pro-life activists wonder if the NAACP's criticism of Pickering is also linked to his position on abortion. “I can't comment on the sincerity of the NAACP, but you do have groups like NARAL grouped together with the NAACP,” said Doug Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee.

Johnson added that The New York Times article provides difficulty for groups like the NAACP and People for the American Way.

“It lays out the facts and they speak for themselves,” said Johnson. “But it was quite remarkable to be seen in that paper.”

He noted that even The Washington Post, while still opposing Pickering, denounced the tactics employed by the left-wing interest groups.

“None of these incidents, when examined closely, amounts to much,” the Post wrote in an editorial Feb. 17. “But opponents string them together, gloss over their complexities and self-righteously present a caricature of an unworthy candidate.”

The attacks against Pickering are apparently working. Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein, DCalif., said Feb. 24 on NBC's “Meet the Press” that all 10 Democrats on the 19-member committee will vote against Pickering, meaning his appointment would be killed before going to the Senate floor.

Pickering's supporters say he would be confirmed if the nomination went to the floor, because Democratic Senators Zell Miller of Florida and Fritz Hollings of South Carolina have already said publicly they will vote for confirmation. That would give Republicans the necessary majority if the rest of the Senate split on party lines.

Still a Chance?

Pickering's supporters expressed hope that the flimsiness of the charges against his civil-rights record will salvage his nomination.

One Republican aide said that Democratic votes on the Judiciary Committee might switch because of the press coverage, Pro-life Infonet reported Feb. 28.

Said the Republican aide, “If the vote were held right after the committee hearing [Feb. 7], we would have lost, but the Democrats are getting pressure from their own press. We are better off than we were a week ago.”

Josh Mercer writes