WEEK IN REVIEW: WASHINGTON, D.C.

Sunday, Nov. 4, 2007 | 1:44 a.m.

WASHINGTON - As you pass the Justice Department , with its enormous art deco doors shut securely for the night, it's hard to imagine the turmoil that has raged behind that stoic facade since the new Congress took over this year.

Democrats might be taking a public beating for not living up to all voters hoped for after the party returned to power in Washington. The war in Iraq continues. Partisan infighting wastes away the days on the Hill.

But gone is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, ousted after an assertion of congressional oversight of the executive branch that, by many measures, had been lacking for years. What started as a relentless line of questioning about the unprecedented purge of U.S. attorneys nationwide, including Nevada's Daniel Bogden, ended with Gonzales stepping down after years of simmering grievances on issues including domestic spying and the treatment of war prisoners.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was asked a few weeks ago as the Senate Judiciary Committee was debating Michael Mukasey, the nominee for that post, how management at the Justice Department would be different.

Reid quipped: "Maybe it's one that does legal things."

But Mukasey's nomination had stalled over his reluctance to out himself as a believer in the illegality of waterboarding, that poster child of the torture debate. Waterboarding, which Washington now knows dates from the Spanish Inquisition, is a process of simulated drowning.

Mukasey said he personally finds the practice repugnant, and legal experts explain his bind. If he calls it illegal, he could expose those within the Bush administration who have condoned it to legal liability.

"The next question would be 'What are you going to do about the people in this administration who approved waterboarding?' " said Christopher Anders, legal counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington. "This is all about avoiding the next question."

The Senate now faces a great challenge: Does it approve an otherwise qualified nominee and let the torture thing slide, or does it say once and for all that Congress will not stand for torture?

Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden has offered legislation to put Congress on record opposing torture with a bill that specifically names waterboarding. Legal experts will tell you there are already a half -dozen laws and treaties on the books outlawing the practice, although one more could help.

Legal scholar Marty Lederman blogged Friday that what the Senate should do is "tell President Bush that it will confirm Judge Mukasey if and only if - and after - the president signs the Biden bill."

Reid came under fire last year for not doing enough to try to stop the Military Commissions Act from becoming law, despite what constitutional rights groups assert was its unfair treatment of prisoners.

Now Reid says he might be inclined to go through the procedural back-flip of keeping the Senate in session during the upcoming holiday season to prevent Bush from ushering in Mukasey through a recess appointment. Bush has been incensed by the Senate's delay.

But such dramatic action might be moot. With more Democrats coming to Mukasey's support, Reid might not have the votes needed to stop the nomination from moving forward.

"This is a moment where the Senate really has to stand its ground and say if the attorney general isn't able to call things by their rightful name and concede this has been illegal for years and years, he doesn't get the job," said professor Sanford Levin of the University of Texas at Austin, who has written extensively on torture laws. "Torture really is the issue of the hour."

Nevada Republican Rep. Dean Heller started the year as perhaps the least influential member of Congress. Literally. There's a list for these things, and as a freshman from a small state, he ranked at the bottom.

But that might be starting to change. Heller received decent marks last week for his supporting role in the recent mining law debate.

Even though he opposes the bill, as does the rest of Nevada's delegation, he was able to persuade the House to agree to one of his amendments. It would give states, including Nevada, a greater portion of any new mining tax.

Heller said after the vote that his amendment "made a very, very bad bill a little bit better."

Boosting his profile may have come just in time. Democrat Jill Derby, who came within a few points of beating him in the last election, might be considering another run against in him 2008, according to a knowledgeable Democratic source.

Heller said he intends to run again.