Bitter Stalemate Develops Over 3 Judgeships : Judiciary: The U.S. Justice Department has refused to accept candidates recommended by then-Sen. Pete Wilson.

A bitter stalemate has emerged over the U.S. Department of Justice’s refusal to accept three federal judgeship candidates who were recommended by Gov. Pete Wilson when he was a senator and endorsed by his successor, John Seymour.

Approval has been blocked on a variety of grounds, according to some of those involved in the dispute: Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William A. Masterson is regarded by the department as too old at 60, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dzintra I. Janavs as too liberal, and San Diego trial lawyer James A. McIntyre as too obscure.

The department’s refusal to endorse the three for nomination by President Bush has roused an unusual protest from the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. and a sharp attack on a key Justice Department official by a top Wilson aide.

“Each of those reasons given are manifestly wrong and, frankly, outrageous,” said Ira Goldman, special assistant to the governor.

Goldman points the finger at Murray Dickman, who handles judicial selection for U.S. Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh.

“The problem is that Murray Dickman has taken on himself, in some Napoleonic stance, to take charge in the absence of adult supervision by the attorney general,” Goldman said sarcastically. “No one blames the White House for this problem. It’s a problem with the Justice Department.”

The bar association’s executive committee, in a letter signed by its president, Andrea Sheridan Ordin, last week appealed to Bush to break the stalemate. The letter said the two candidates that Wilson and Seymour are backing for judgeships in Los Angeles are “highly regarded”--and should be judged on their skills and experience, “not on the basis of arbitrary or inappropriate criteria.”

Sheldon H. Sloan of Los Angeles, chairman of the association’s judicial evaluation committee, credits Wilson with a thorough screening process to find well-qualified candidates.

“We’re talking about legal lights here--not just friends of the governor,” said Sloan. “For some reason, best known only to Mr. Dickman and the Department of Justice, they just don’t find them acceptable. . . . It’s a travesty.”

Dickman was reported to be traveling Tuesday and calls to the department’s office of public affairs were not returned.

The prospective judicial nominees find themselves in the uncomfortable and frustrating position of being placed “on hold” while the dispute drags on.

McIntyre, 52, a specialist in defending insurers, was selected by Wilson for the federal District Court in San Diego. He said Tuesday that he had little insight into why his candidacy has stalled. Dickman recently telephoned him to say that “obscurity” was not the reason for the delay, but offered no other clear explanation, McIntyre said.

“I don’t think I’m obscure,” he said good-naturedly. “But I don’t think that’s the reason.”

Masterson, an experienced civil attorney who was named to the state bench in December, 1987, by then-Gov. George Deukmejian, declined comment.

Janavs, 55, a former assistant U.S. attorney named to that post by Deukmejian in 1986, said she had never been told why her nomination was stalled. Asked whether she considered herself a liberal, she replied: “I don’t think labels are very meaningful and I certainly don’t think anyone can draw any such conclusions from my (record).”

The dispute arises as judicial vacancies have been mounting, particularly in the district courts, which conduct trials. Nationally, there are 117 vacancies among 649 federal district judgeships, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. California has 12 vacancies among 55 such posts.

The selection process for federal judgeships is long and politically complicated--and disputes among senators, Justice Department officials and the White House historically are not uncommon.

Ordinarily, senators whose party occupies the White House recommend candidates for judgeships. After screening by the Justice Department, an approved candidate is formally nominated by the President. Then the nomination is reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee and must be confirmed by the full Senate.

According to a source familiar with the process, in the past, Sen. Wilson presented one candidate for each vacant post. When the Bush Administration took office, Justice Department officials asked for three candidates for each post from which to make its choice. Wilson balked--and the department relented, on the condition that if the one candidate were unacceptable it would ask for another name.

These three Wilson and Seymour choices were turned down on grounds that Masterson was “too old,” Janavs’ rulings “suggested a liberal point of view” and McIntyre was “not substantial enough,” Goldman said.

Meanwhile, Seymour is reported to be declining to send additional names to the department but still seeking a resolution of the dispute with Thornburgh.

A spokesman for Seymour, H.D. Palmer, said, “He has been working with the Justice Department on the question of judicial nominees and intends to keep working in a cooperative manner and get the bench up to strength.”

Times researcher Norma Kaufman contributed to this report.

S JUDGES