Last Saturday, following bitterly partisan hearings, Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court by one of the slimmest margins in American history. The Senate failed by every metric to learn from its missteps in the 1991 Clarence Thomas hearings during which Anita Hill’s testimony was met by senators with at best a lack of understanding and at worse by outright hostility. The confirmation process for Justice Kavanaugh served as an opportunity to reset the nation’s sensitivity to sexual politics. Instead, most Republican senators chose to grudgingly acknowledge Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s credibility while simultaneously pressing forward undeterred with the nomination. The Republican’s relentless drive to change the ideological balance of our highest court was a gift to partisan interest groups at the expense of our faith in democratic goals of our great political institutions as well as our society’s empathy and respect for assault survivors.
The Kavanaugh confirmation process parallels the 1991 hearings for then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. Party makeup in Congress, however, emerges as one key difference. Although the Democratic Party controlled both the House and Senate by large margins in 1991, its leaders proved themselves to be more interested in political maneuvering than with discovering the truth. Judiciary chairman Senator Joseph Biden had the power to set the rules for additional hearings, but fully accommodated requests of the Republican minority by: 1) agreeing to time constraints allowing only 4 days between the first day of hearings and the floor vote (with only two days to investigate Professor Hill’s charges); 2) agreeing that the Judiciary Committee would not take another vote even if new evidence emerged during the hearings; and 3) agreeing to an investigation of limited scope that excluded general questions about Thomas’ sexual conduct and his interest in pornography. In a similar vein, the Senate and White House significantly reduced the scope of investigation into claims levied against Justice Kavanaugh by capping the number of witnesses interviewed by the FBI, limiting the investigation to one week, and failing to fully investigate the claims of Debbie Ramirez. Senator Susan Collins, likewise, followed Senator Nancy Kassenbaum’s 1991 playbook in voting for a nominee facing credible accusations of sexual assault. Considered a moderate Republican, and only one of two women serving in the Senate, Kassenbaum initially appeared to be a swing vote. She, too, however, buckled under intense party pressure.
As upsetting as Saturday’s vote was to many Americans, voters still have reason for hope. Following the Thomas hearings, an unprecedented number of women ran for public office and won. The upcoming midterm elections could provide a platform for a repeat performance. Thenmozhi Soundararajan, executive director of Equality Labs, eloquently captures the triumphs of survivors despite the Kavanugh setback. Writing for the Huffington Post, she notes that, “[Republicans] think that they’re winning, but they have basically ignited a movement that’s never going to go away.”
Participation in this movement can take many forms—whether it’s calling your senators, protesting outside the Supreme Court, or sharing your personal stories and experiences. I am proud that The Voice can support this movement by serving as a medium for students to share their experiences. In this issue, you will find opinions articles that detail the personal reactions of two Conn students to the Kavanaugh hearings. To all the survivors of sexual assault and their allies, thank you for having the courage to speak up and share your truth.
For all of us, we need to use our voices effectively on November 6 to show this president and Congress that you believe that survivors deserve our support and that you will stand up against a culture that excuses perpetrators.
-Dana
