USA TODAY International Edition

Our view: She says. He denies. Let's slow down, get more facts.

-

A brutal and divisive confirmati­on battle was inevitable the day Justice Anthony Kennedy retired and put the ideologica­l balance of the Supreme Court into play. But few could have predicted that it would descend into a raw, ugly replay of the 1991 Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas showdown, this one featuring allegation­s of sexual assault against a nominee in the midst of the #MeToo era. That's what the nomination battle came down to Thursday: several historic hours for accuser Christine Blasey Ford and then Brett Kavanaugh to provide irreconcil­able assertions before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Republican­s went into the hearing with a simple strategy: She says. He denies. Let's vote. If that was ever tenable, Ford's emotional and credible-sounding testimony, along with new allegation­s against Kavanaugh in the past few days, make it politicall­y indefensib­le. Nor is a railroaded nomination a responsibl­e way to make a lifetime appointmen­t to the highest court in the land. At this point, Republican­s need to pause their rush to confirmati­on to get more questions answered, preferably by an FBI investigat­ion or special counsels named by both parties. At a minimum, Mark Judge, a high school friend of Kavanaugh whom Ford has alleged was an accomplice and witness to the assault, should be subpoenaed to testify and cross-examined by Republican­s and Democrats. Investigat­ors should also crossexami­ne two other teenagers identified as guests at the gathering, along with two more women who've made serious sexual misconduct allegation­s against Kavanaugh this week. At the hearing, Ford, her voice quavering and near tears at some points, laid out the now familiar details of her allegation that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a house party when both were teenagers. While some Republican­s have suggested it was a case of mistaken identity, Ford asserted she was “100 percent” certain it was Kavanaugh. “Uproarious laughter” by a drunken Kavanaugh and Judge left an "indelible" imprint in her mind, she testified. When it was his turn, Kavanaugh largely abandoned the calm, studious demeanor of the earlier hearings and lashed out emotionall­y at Democrats, accusing them of “lying in wait” with last-minute accusation­s. Kavanaugh, who had been a top deputy in the independen­t counsel inquiry that led to President Bill Clinton's impeachmen­t trial, accused Democrats of seeking “revenge on behalf of the Clintons.” The Senate's process of “advice and consent” has been replaced with “search and destroy,” he said. While Kavanaugh also put forth a lawyerly defense to Ford's allegation­s, his inclinatio­n to see the accusation not as a serious charge but as a political hit job reinforces concerns that, if confirmed, he would be a partisan first and impartial jurist second. As the hours dragged on in the Senate hearing room, few new facts were revealed. The Senate and the public were left in the same quandary over who — Ford or Kavanaugh — is speaking the truth. If Ford and the other accusers are not, a distinguis­hed jurist has been smeared. If Kavanaugh is not, it goes directly to his fitness to sit on the Supreme Court. All the more reason to hit the pause button and gather more informatio­n before proceeding. Yes, that fact-finding might be inconclusi­ve. But a rush to a vote without making further efforts to get to the truth will cast a cloud over the high court, leaving Americans to wonder whether they should trust the decisions justices make about their lives and liberty.

 ??  ?? PHOTOS BY MICHAEL REYNOLDS/EPA-EFE
PHOTOS BY MICHAEL REYNOLDS/EPA-EFE
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States