Sandoval defends stance taken in response to question by paper

Erin Neff

Tuesday, Oct. 22, 2002 | 11:23 a.m.

Democratic Party officials, attorneys and Jewish community leaders said this morning that recent comments by Republican attorney general candidate Brian Sandoval showed a lack of judgment and understanding about the role of the office.

Sandoval, quoted in the Sunday Las Vegas Review-Journal, responded to a theoretical question by saying he would enforce a law that required Jews to wear the Star of David if it were passed by the Legislature.

Sandoval said Monday night that the press conference today was a "desperate" attempt to make up ground in the race.

In Sunday's Review-Journal, assistant editorial page editor Vin Suprynowicz wrote a column on limited government and how some candidates and politicians, in his opinion, overstep the boundaries the founders of this country established by separating powers among three branches of government.

During a meeting of the Review-Journal's editorial board, Sandoval was asked why he would enforce a state law against anonymous political leafletting. Sandoval, a Republican, answered that he would uphold all laws.

" 'Come on,' I demanded, 'you're saying that if the Legislature passed a law requiring all Jews to wear yellow stars of David sewn on the outside of their clothing, you'd enforce it?' " Suprynowicz wrote.

" 'It's my job to enforce it,' " Sandoval's response read.

On Monday, Sandoval stood by the statement that he would uphold the state's laws, but said the entire question was such a "ridiculous premise" that he was simply trying to answer with the attorney general's office job duties in mind.

"I am absolutely not anti-Semitic and any attempt by my opponent to paint me that way would be offensive and an obvious desperation move with two weeks to go before an election," Sandoval said.

At a press conference this morning called by Democratic Party leaders outside the George Federal Building downtown, attorneys and Jewish community leaders said Sandoval's statements showed a lack of judgment.

State Democratic Party Chairman Terry Care, who is an attorney, said he thinks Sandoval erred in his response to the columnist's question, saying "there's no excuse for comments like that."

"It's the lack of judgment issue and his apparent belief that it's the role of the attorney general to enforce a law even if it's unconstitutional," Care said.

Sharyn Stein, spokeswoman for Hunt's campaign, said Hunt was not at this morning's press conference because the issue "is between Mr. Sandoval and the Jewish community."

"John Hunt said he's disappointed by the comments and says it shows a lack of judgement," Stein said. "The attorney general is expected to use his discretion and he should have known that obviously the attorney general does not enforce unconstitutional laws."

Lee Plotkin, executive director of the National Conference for Community and Justice's Las Vegas chapter, said he found Sandoval's comments disturbing from a broader perspective.

"In Afghanistan they're talking about the Taliban, but in Southern Nevada we're talking about the moral mob mentality," Plotkin said.

He cited the "anti-gay movement in Question 2" and resistance the Las Vegas fire chief is getting to his diversity efforts as two examples of "symptomatic political pragmatism gone wild."

"You may wind up electing officials that will enforce something on you next," Plotkin said, after a reference to Nazi Germany.

Henry Schuster, co-president of the Holocaust Survivors Group, said he was "outraged at the insensitivity of the statement Mr. Sandoval made."

"I remember the Nazis always said 'We were following orders,'" Schuster said. "His answer should have been to challenge the unconstitutionality of the law."

But Sandoval found a supporter in Burton Cohen, president of the local Anti-Defamation League.

"In my close to 40 years in this community, I have never seen a question asked of someone that is more despicable," Cohen said Monday night. "It is Jew-baiting at its worst.

"A question like that is only designed to incite prejudice."

Cohen, a registered Democrat, said he has met Sandoval and said the incident made him believe more strongly that Sandoval "doesn't have a racist bone in his body." Cohen said he will vote for Sandoval.

Cohen said any use of the column for political gain would simply be designed to "polarize Jewish votes or incite bigots."

"Any politician who tries to make political hay out of this has to have their own integrity questioned," Cohen said.

Sandoval has been consistent in his responses about upholding laws since a minor flub during a debate in mid-September. Sandoval said in a debate at UNLV that since he opposes ballot Question 9 -- the marijuana initiative -- he would not fight to uphold it should it pass.

However, immediately after the debate, Sandoval said that while he personally opposed the initiative, he would uphold it were it to become law.

Hunt, however, given the same example during a meeting of the Sun's editorial board, said he would not uphold the law.

Cohen said that question is better suited to determine which of the candidates would enforce a law in conflict with federal law or personal belief.

Suprunowicz's question, Cohen added, is a trick question and "is better relegated to Nazi Germany."

Sandoval's campaign consultant, Pete Ernaut, said Hunt is trying to use the issue because he is behind in the race by about 10 percentage points, according to Ernaut's tracking polls.

Ernaut said Sandoval has about a 10 point lead statewide with roughly 16 percent of voters undecided.

"It's a desperate move from a candidate who is still behind and who hasn't made up any ground by attacking us with that adoption ad," Ernaut said.

The ad in question is a testimonial from a northern Nevada couple who said "Brian Sandoval almost ruined our family" based on complications that arose with an adoption four years ago.

The ad does not make it clear that Sandoval was not the couple's attorney, or that he represented Catholic Services and was responsible for finding the biological father of the adopted baby. The biological father initially raised issues of custody.

Sandoval's campaign will begin airing a response to that ad this week.