Clarence Thomas Supreme Court nomination

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please improve this article if you can. (November 2007)

On July 1, 1991 President George H.W. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court of the United States of America to replace Thurgood Marshall who had recently announced his retirement.[1] The nomination proceedings became controversial when toward the end of the confirmation hearings it came to light that law school professor Anita Hill had accused Thomas of sexually harassing her when the two had worked together at the DOE and EEOC.

Contents

[edit] Nomination

On July 1, 1991 President George H.W. Bush nominated Thomas to replace Thurgood Marshall who had recently announced his retirement.[2] Marshall had been the first and only African American justice on the court. The selection of Thomas preserved the existing racial composition of the court, but it was seen as likely to move the ideological balance to the right.

American Bar Association's (ABA) rating for Judge Thomas was split between "qualified" and "not qualified." The ABA, however, has no official standing in the nomination or confirmation process.

Liberal organizations including the NAACP, the Urban League and the National Organization for Women opposed the appointment based on Thomas's criticism of affirmative action and suspicions that Thomas might not be a supporter of the Supreme Court judgment in Roe v. Wade.[citation needed] Under questioning during confirmation hearings, Thomas repeatedly asserted that he had not formulated a position on the Roe decision.[3]

Some of the public statements of Thomas's opponents foreshadowed the confirmation fight that would occur. One such statement came from activist Florence Kennedy at a July 1991 conference of the National Organization for Women in New York City. Making reference to the failure of Robert Bork's nomination, she said of Thomas, "We're going to 'bork' him."[4]

[edit] Anita Hill

Toward the end of the confirmation hearings NPR's Supreme Court correspondent Nina Totenberg reported that a former colleague of Thomas, University of Oklahoma law school professor Anita Hill, had accused him of sexually harassing her when the two had worked together at the DOE and EEOC based on a leaked Judiciary committee FBI report.[5][6] Also, she testified that she wanted to work in the civil-rights field, and that she believed that "at that time the Department of Education, itself, was a dubious venture." [7]

[edit] Hill's testimony

Hill's testimony included a wide variety of language she allegedly was subjected to by Thomas that she found inappropriate:

"He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes....On several occasions, Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess....Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office, he got up from the table at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, 'Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?'." [8]

Four individuals (Ellen Wells, John W. Carr, Judge Susan Hoerchner, and Joel Paul) testified that Hill had been upset at the time she worked for Thomas about what she had said was sexual harassment by him. Angela Wright, another of Thomas' subordinates, stated that she had also been sexually harassed by him and Rose Jourdain testified that Wright had been upset at that time about what she had also said was sexual harassment by Thomas. [9]

Thomas made a blanket denial of the accusations and, after extensive debate, the U.S. Senate narrowly confirmed Thomas by a vote of 52-48. [10]

In 1991, public opinion polls showed that 47% of those polled believed Thomas, while 24% believed Hill. In 1992, a different poll had 44% believing Hill and only 34% believing Thomas.[citation needed]

The hearings were notable for their sexually explicit content, particularly Senator Orrin Hatch's (R-UT) questions [D]id you ever say in words or substance something like there is a pubic hair in my Coke? and Did you ever use the term Long Dong Silver in conversation with Professor Hill? (Thomas firmly denied having said either, as well as denying having seen The Exorcist, in which Jack MacGowran's character says at a party, There seems to be an alien pubic hair in my drink.) Also, Angela Wright, who worked with Thomas at the EEOC, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Thomas had repeatedly made comments to her, much like those he allegedly made to Hill, pressuring her for dates, commenting on her body, etc. As chair of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Joseph Biden decided against publicly hearing Wright's testimony. Another former Thomas assistant, Sukari Hardnett, made further damaging charges against him. Although Hardnett made it clear she was not accusing Thomas of sexual harassment, she provided the Judiciary Committee with sworn testimony that "if you were young, black, female, reasonably attractive and worked directly for Clarence Thomas, you knew full well you were being inspected and auditioned as a female."

Of the Committee's investigation of Hill's accusations, Thomas said: This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.[11]

After extensive debate, the Committee sent the nomination to the full Senate without a recommendation either way. Thomas was confirmed by the Senate with a 52-48 vote on October 15, 1991, the narrowest margin for approval in more than a century[12]. The final floor vote was not along strictly party lines: 41 Republicans and 11 Democrats (Dixon (D-IL), Exon (D-NE), DeConcini (D-AZ), Robb (D-VA), Hollings (D-SC), Fowler (D-GA), Nunn (D-GA), Breaux (D-LA), Johnston (D-LA), Boren (D-OK), and Shelby (D-AL) now (R-AL)) voted to confirm while 46 Democrats and 2 Republicans (Jeffords (R-VT) and Packwood[13] (R-OR)) voted to reject the nomination.

On October 23, 1991 Thomas took his seat as the 106th Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

[edit] Effects

Public interest in, and debate over, Hill's testimony is said by some to have launched modern-day public awareness of the issue of sexual harassment in the United States. Some also link this to what is known as the Year of the Woman (1992), when a significant number of women were simultaneously elected to the federal legislative branch.[citation needed]

[edit] Books

Doubts about Hill's testimony were furthered by the widely publicized and later recanted claims of David Brock, in his book The Real Anita Hill. Brock, later describing the book as "character assassination", disavowed it and apologized to Hill; he also suggests that he used information provided by an intermediary of Thomas to threaten another witness, Kaye Savage, into backing down, which Savage confirms.[14] His recantation was published in the July 1997 issue of Esquire Magazine, in a piece titled "I was a Conservative Hit Man." [14] and, in his subsequent book, Blinded by the Right, he accuses himself of being "a witting cog in the Republican sleaze machine."

In 1998, Anita Hill penned her autobiography, Speaking Truth To Power.

"I see ... the faces of these young people, and I see their hearts and that they really do want change, and that they deserve it," said Hill. "They deserve a better society and so that is what motivates me and I think that I can be a part of creating that and having [been] given that chance, I don't want to blow it."

In 2007, Clarence Thomas published his memoirs, revisiting the Anita Hill controversy. He describes her as touchy and apt to overreact and her work at the EEOC as mediocre. [15] He wrote:

On Sunday morning, courtesy of Newsday, I met for the first time an Anita Hill who bore little resemblance to the woman who had worked for me at EEOC and the Education Department. Somewhere along the line she had been transformed into a conservative, devoutly religious Reagan-administration employee. In fact she was a left-winger who'd never expressed any religious sentiments whatsoever during the time I'd known her, and the only reason why she'd held a job in the Reagan administration was because I'd given it to her.

In an op-ed piece written by Anita Hill, appearing in the New York Times on October 2, 2007, Ms. Hill writes that she "will not stand by silently and allow [Justice Thomas], in his anger, to reinvent me."

[edit] References

  1. ^ New York Times
  2. ^ New York Times
  3. ^ It is routine for nominees, at all levels of the Federal judiciary, to refuse to discuss cases during their confirmation hearings that might come before them if they are confirmed. Clinton appointed Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Steven Breyer both refused to discuss Roe before the Judiciary Committee, even though Ginsburg has worked for years for the ALCU defending it. Despite this nearly universal refusal of nominees to discuss hot button issues such as Roe, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee nearly always try to draw the nominee's view out during confirmation hearings.
  4. ^ Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal The term Bork has since become a part of the American political lexicon and has come to mean the defeat of conservative nominees for allegedly being "out of the judicial mainstream"; conservatives, conversely, use the term to describe what they consider unscrupulous tactics to derail the nominations of nominees unacceptable to left-leaning interest groups.
  5. ^ Nina Totenberg, NPR Biography. National Public Radio. Retrieved on 2008-05-31.
  6. ^ You must specify title = and url = when using {{cite web}}.. National Public Radio (1991-10-06). Retrieved on 2008-05-31. On October 11, 1991, Hill was called to testify during the hearing. In 1981, Hill became an attorney-adviser to Clarence Thomas at the U.S. Department of Education (ED). When Thomas became Chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Hill went to the EEOC with Thomas and his then-secretary, Diane Holt, to serve as his special assistant. Hill alleges that it was during these two periods (i.e., during her employment at ED and EEOC) that Thomas made sexually provocative statements. Although Hill was a career employee (Schedule A) and therefore had the option of remaining at the Department of Education, she testified that she followed Thomas because, "[t]he work, itself, was interesting, and at that time, it appeared that the sexual overtures . . . had ended." <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh102-1084pt4/36-40.pdf|title=TESTIMONY OF ANITA F. HILL, PROFESSOR OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA, NORMAN, OK|date=1991-10-11|pages=37|publisher=US Government Printing Office|accessdate=2007-10-03}}</li> <li id="cite_note-6">'''[[#cite_ref-6|^]]''' {{cite web|url=http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh102-1084pt4/36-40.pdf|title=TESTIMONY OF ANITA F. HILL, PROFESSOR OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA, NORMAN, OK|date=1991-10-11|pages=37|publisher=US Government Printing Office|accessdate=2007-10-03}}</li> <li id="cite_note-7">'''[[#cite_ref-7|^]]''' "Opening Statement: Sexual Harassment Hearings Concerning Judge Clarence Thomas," Women's Speeches from Around the World [[http://gos.sbc.edu/h/hill.html]]</li> <li id="cite_note-8">'''[[#cite_ref-8|^]]''' {{Citation | first = | last = | author-link = | first2 = | last2 = | author2-link = | editor-last = | editor-first = | editor2-last = | editor2-first = | contribution = | contribution-url = | title = HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON THE NOMINATION OF CLARENCE THOMAS TO BE ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES | year = 1991 | pages =273-331, 442-551 | place =Washington, DC | publisher =U.S Government Printing Office | url = http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/04oct20051455/www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh102-1084pt4/sh102-1084pt4.zip | doi = | id = | isbn = 0-16-040838-5 }} </li> <li id="cite_note-9">'''[[#cite_ref-9|^]]''' [http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/10/14/ap3091375.html Today in History - Oct. 15] - [[Forbes Magazine]], [[October 14]] [[2006]].</li> <li id="cite_note-10">'''[[#cite_ref-10|^]]''' [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new-yitna?id=UsaThom&images=images/modeng&data=/lv6/workspace/yitna&tag=public&part=24 Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court], ''Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library'', October 11, 1991.</li> <li id="cite_note-11">'''[[#cite_ref-11|^]]''' Hall, Kermit (ed), ''The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States'', page 871, Oxford Press, 1992</li> <li id="cite_note-12">'''[[#cite_ref-12|^]]''' [[Bob Packwood|Packwood]] himself would later be forced to resign from the Senate in the face accusations of sexual harassment, abuse and assault by numerous former staffers and lobbyists.</li> <li id="cite_note-cd-13">^ [[#cite_ref-cd_13-0|<sup>'''''a'''''</sup>]]&#32;[[#cite_ref-cd_13-1|<sup>'''''b'''''</sup>]] [http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0627-01.htm Critic of Anita Hill Now Admits Lying<!-- Bot generated title -->]</li> <li id="cite_note-14">'''[[#cite_ref-14|^]]''' "16 years later, Thomas fires back at Anita Hill," MSNBC.com, [[28 September]] [[2007]],http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21038082/.</li></ol></ref>