Alito denies conflict in '02 Vanguard case

''I respectfully submit that it was not inconsistent with my questionnaire response for me to participate in two isolated cases seven and 13 years later, respectively," he wrote.

Alito issued the letter one day after all eight Democrats on the committee called for voluminous records involving a 2002 case in which Vanguard was a defendant. They pointed out that Alito had promised at the time of his confirmation to the appeals court seat that he would avoid cases involving Vanguard; Smith Barney; First Federal Savings & Loan of Rochester, N.Y.; and his sister's law firm.

Democrats addressed their letter to the chief judge of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and did not accuse Alito of bending his ruling to favor Vanguard. Instead, they raised possible conflict-of-interest concerns and said Alito had violated the promise he made to the committee 15 years ago.

Even so, the Democratic challenge prompted Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, to write Alito yesterday to suggest a quick response. ''I think it is important that the issues be addressed promptly, since a number of senators have expressed concerns," Specter advised.

Alito was officially nominated by the White House yesterday to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whose judicial rulings have made her the swing vote on the Supreme Court on issues such as abortion and affirmative action. Alito, a 55-year-old New Jersey native, has won strong support from Senate Republicans and has elicited praise from several Democratic senators with whom he has met privately.

Confirmation hearings are scheduled for Jan. 9, and Wednesday's letter from Democrats on the panel marked their first organized challenge to his nomination.

Specter warned Alito in his letter that waiting to answer the conflict-of-interest questions would only allow ''your adversaries to speculate on this issue to the detriment of your nomination."

The senator said he thinks ''there has been no impropriety." But he added that ''we have seen issues which may be minor, unmeritorious, and even nonexistent proliferate into major controversies by those who are opposed for other reasons."