If you thought the accession of Justice Alito to the Supreme Court marked the end of the judicial confirmation battles that roiled the Senate earlier in President Bush’s tenure, you were wrong. After taking a breather, Senate Republicans are gearing up to enter the fray again, and hope to notch up their first victory of the new campaign before the Senate adjourns for its Memorial Day recess at the end of May.

In a recent conversation with reporters, an aide to Majority Leader Frist made clear that the senator intends to bring one high profile nominee to the floor before the holiday. That nominee will be Brett Kavanaugh, who has been named to served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the circuit court responsible for many suits involving the federal government and its powers. Mr. Kavanaugh has spent much of his career in public service, including as an associate counsel in Kenneth Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel. He currently holds the post of staff secretary to the president, in which capacity he coordinates the flow of documents across Mr. Bush’s desk. He has also served as an appellate lawyer in private practice at Kirkland & Ellis, where he was a partner. The American Bar Association has rated him “well qualified.”

Yet the Democrats can’t stand him. Although after only one low profile hearing it’s hard to say exactly what ammunition they will fire his way as his confirmation gathers steam in the next few weeks, discontent is likely to focus on three areas. They will object to his youth (he turned 41 in February) and his service in Mr. Starr’s office. Neither of these is likely to get far. In particular, his record from the Independent Counsel’s office shows nothing so much as that he’s an exemplary lawyer with a commitment to public service and experience at that hazy nexis where government officials meet accountability, terrain frequently tread by the circuit-riders whose ranks he has been appointed to join.

More damaging might be an attempt, already being ventured about in some circles, to tarnish him with the torture issue. In particular, the allegation would run that as the staff secretary to Mr. Bush’s cabinet, he was somehow involved in the decision to employ some physical interrogation methods against terror suspects. But the Democrats are themselves treading perilous ground if they elect to take this path. The charges won’t hold up – Mr. Kavanaugh’s post, prestigious though it is, is an administrative one and he has not been responsible for making any decisions himself. But they will turn attention again on the Democrats and the avidity – or lack of it – with which they would prosecute the war on terror.

In this respect, the decision to focus on pushing Mr. Kavanaugh through the Senate could prove a particularly savvy one. Not only do Republicans think that judicial confirmation is a winning issue for them in 2006, but a debate over Mr. Kavanaugh’s nomination, if the debate focuses on torture and the war on terror, will only focus the public on national security, a weak spot for Democrats.

However the debate ultimately plays out, however, one thing is for sure: Another judicial debate is coming. That news will hearten any American with an interest in constitutional principles. Already, more than 50% of judges on the bench today were appointed either by President Reagan or by the first or second President Bush, presidents who, by and large, have understood the importance of judicial restraint. If Mr. Frist has his way, that percentage will increase before the summer is out.