Different Takes: Let’s Not Repeat The Debacle Of The Clarence Thomas Hearings And Fail On Best Ways To Address Sexual Violence Allegations
Opinion writers weigh in on the importance of properly vetting sexual violence claims, in this case allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
The New York Times:
Anita Hill: How To Get The Kavanaugh Hearings Right
There is no way to redo 1991, but there are ways to do better. The facts underlying Christine Blasey Ford’s claim of being sexually assaulted by a young Brett Kavanaugh will continue to be revealed as confirmation proceedings unfold. Yet it’s impossible to miss the parallels between the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing of 2018 and the 1991 confirmation hearing for Justice Clarence Thomas. In 1991, the Senate Judiciary Committee had an opportunity to demonstrate its appreciation for both the seriousness of sexual harassment claims and the need for public confidence in the character of a nominee to the Supreme Court. It failed on both counts. (Anita Hill, 9/18)
Los Angeles Times:
I Broke The Anita Hill Story. Here's What We Need To Learn From Her Treatment
When I first called Anita Hill in 1991 to ask her, out of the blue, if she had been sexually harassed by then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, she was very reluctant to give me any details. ... In my opinion, if Hill’s story had been handled properly earlier in the process, and she had been given time to prepare to testify, Thomas would not today be the senior associate justice on the Supreme Court. (Timothy M. Phelps, 9/18)
The New York Times:
The Pro-Life Movement’s Kavanaugh Dilemma
Even if it wins its long-desired victory at the high court and more anti-abortion legislation becomes possible, a pro-life cause joined to a party that can’t win female votes and seems to have no time for women will never be able to achieve those legislative goals, or at least never outside a very few, very conservative states. And having that long-awaited victory accomplished by a male judicial appointee confirmed under a cloud of #MeToo suspicion seems like a good way to cement a perception that’s fatal to the pro-life movement’s larger purposes — the perception that you can’t be pro-woman and pro-life. (Ross Douthat, 9/18)
