Senate Opposition to Nomination of Manion Growing

Despite the pleas of President Reagan, opposition continued to mount Tuesday against his nomination of Daniel A. Manion, a conservative former state senator from South Bend, Ind., to a federal appellate judgeship.

For the most part, the President’s 264 prior nominations to the federal district and appellate bench have encountered little opposition in gaining confirmation by the Senate. But his selection of the 44-year-old Manion to join the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago appeared in jeopardy as the Senate began considering the nomination Tuesday.

A vote against Manion would mark the first time that a Reagan judicial nominee had been defeated on the Senate floor. Earlier this month, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected a Reagan choice for the first time, turning down the selection of Jefferson B. Sessions III to be a federal district judge in Mobile, Ala.

The President has made the Manion nomination a test of his power to fill the federal bench, defending his decision in his weekly radio address Saturday and in an interview Monday with The Times.

Atty. Gen. Edwin Meese III, in a statement issued Tuesday, reiterated the Administration’s support, saying that Manion’s “qualifications are simply not in doubt, the partisan attacks on him notwithstanding.”

Meese sought to counter the fact that Manion received only a rating of “qualified” by the American Bar Assn.--its lowest approval rating--by pointing out that about 45% of all the federal judges confirmed by the Senate over the last decade under two administrations had received similar ratings.

Opposed by Byrd

The opposition to Manion emerged on a wide front Tuesday. Senate Democratic leader Robert C. Byrd announced that he will oppose the nomination and predicted that many other Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate will do the same. “The Senate is not a rubber-stamp machine,” Byrd said.

Deans of 44 of the nation’s law schools, along with more than 100 other law professors, said Manion is unqualified for the job--as did leaders of about 50 labor, civil rights and feminist groups.

Their spokesmen said Manion’s defeat could signal a turning point in their largely unsuccessful campaign to oppose the Administration’s efforts to fill openings on the federal bench with judicial conservatives.

“Manion’s defeat would indicate that there are some basic standards for the judiciary and that the Senate is taking its duty to ‘advise and consent’ to the President’s nominations seriously,” said William L. Taylor of the Center for National Policy Review.

Limited Background

The criticism of Manion focuses heavily on his qualifications and comparatively limited legal background. Critics note that the six men the President named earlier to the 7th Circuit had served previously on the federal or state judiciary or had taught law at prestigious institutions.

By contrast, Manion, a member of a small law firm since 1974, has been primarily involved in representing clients in commercial and personal injury claims. He has had only limited experience in federal courts and has never argued before the 7th Circuit. At one time, he served as a deputy state attorney general, working on criminal appellate and property condemnation cases.

When asked by the Senate Judiciary Committee to identify the 10 “most significant” cases in which he has participated as a lawyer, Manion included among others his defense of a mechanic accused of improperly repairing a Volkswagen Rabbit, resulting in poor gas mileage and inferior performance.

Ten Commandments Bill

Manion is also under attack for his sponsorship in 1980 in the Indiana Legislature of a bill authorizing public schools to post the Ten Commandments--an action that took place shortly after the Supreme Court struck down a Kentucky law that required posting of the commandments. Manion testified last spring that he believed that the proposed law, if enacted, also probably would have been declared unconstitutional.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee also have questioned Manion’s credibility in his responses to queries about a letter he wrote that seemed to praise the rightist John Birch Society. Manion’s father, former Notre Dame Law School Dean Clarence Manion, was a founder of the Birch Society and host of a conservative-oriented radio talk show called the “Manion Forum.”

In the letter, a response to condolences from Birch Society members upon the death of the elder Manion, Daniel said the organization was “on the front line of the fight for constitutional freedom” and offered to “help you in whatever causes you may have before the state Legislature.”

In testimony at his confirmation hearing, Manion said the letter did not indicate that he agreed with the group and added: “I could not tell you what the policies of the John Birch Society are.”

Reputation for Fairness

In his defense, Republican members of the committee point to Manion’s reputation for fairness and integrity and say the criticism of his legal background is misleading and degrading. Small-town, small-firm legal practitioners necessarily try most cases in state courts where the monetary stakes, while relatively small, are nonetheless important to the parties in the case.

Further, they say, Manion has repeatedly pledged to follow Supreme Court precedent--and his role of a legislator voting on a bill such as the Ten Commandments proposal would be quite different from that of a federal judge passing on its constitutionality under high court rulings.

Manion’s remarks on the Birch Society were intended only to respond to an expression of sympathy, and he “is not now, nor has he ever been, a member of the John Birch Society,” the Republicans said in a recently issued report on the nomination.

Times staff writer Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story.