Welcome to The Republic, the Badger Herald Opinion & Editorial Page’s blog for national and political news. Read this blog for running analysis and commentary from the Herald’s editors and columnists on the stories that define the current state of the nation.

Now, let’s get down to business.

President Bush’s nominee to replace John Ashcroft as Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, is raising the hackles of civil libertarians and human rights groups for his support of the use of torture as an interrogation tactic on “enemy combatants” and detainees suspected of terrorism. Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff warns that Gonzales could well prove “worse than Ashcroft” for civil rights and liberties, and (in a first for him) suggests that Democrats should filibuster his approval. NPR’s Nina Totenberg has described how

Gonzales was responsible for developing the administration’s policies on the treatment of prisoners; for developing a new definition of torture to allow more aggressive questioning of prisoners. He developed the policy that allowed the indefinite detention of American citizens deemed to be enemy combatants without [being charged] or [having] access to counsel. … The Supreme Court, though, rejected that [Gonzales’] theory…

In addition to going over the heads of military legal brass and advisors in endorsing the use of torture, Gonzales has argued that the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of prisoners of war should be disregarded, and fought the reclassification of “enemy combatants” to prisoners of war.

Gonzales is complicit in the “abuse” (read: torture) of prisoners in Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo. And he favors allowing the sunset clauses of the Patriot Act to lapse, making the law permanent. Anyone who was expecting a respite in the wake of Ashcroft’s resignation can stop sighing in relief now. Barring an unlikely and politically costly Democratic filibuster, Alberto Gonzales may well prove to be “worse than Ashcroft.”