Treat Christine Ford better than Anita Hill
Lessons for Kavanaugh case in 1991 nightmare
I spent a very long weekend in October 1991 with Anita Hill, the law professor who accused then-Judge Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. I wasn’t part of her legal team, but as a Democratic strategist, I helped her and her team understand Congress and organize their effort.
It was one of the most dismal weekends of my life. The Democrats thought they were presiding over a hearing. The Republicans conducted a trial — of the accuser, not the accused. Anita Hill was put on trial and convicted. Clarence Thomas was put on the Supreme Court.
Now psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford must decide whether to testify against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, whom she has accused of sexually assaulting her when they were teens. If and when she makes her case, hopefully after an FBI investigation, senators must remember the lessons of Anita Hill.
At Hill’s hearing, Thomas was permitted to testify first, beginning the process of destruction and laying the onus on Hill to respond. Responsible senators should insist Ford testify first at any hearing. Second, if Ford wishes to have corroborating witnesses, all of them should speak before Kavanaugh’s rebuttal. In Hill’s case, proceedings were ended before all supporting Hill witnesses were allowed to testify. That was a fatal mistake. Hill was literally and figuratively alone.
Third, the polygraph test Ford voluntarily took should be admitted as evidence. Her willingness to take a polygraph and its results are relevant. Kavanaugh should, of course, be given the opportunity to take his own polygraph.
Fourth, Republicans will attempt to make process arguments that the timing of Ford’s allegations was politically motivated and are thus inherently suspect. Democrats must soundly reject process arguments. Hill deeply underestimated the cruel questioning that awaited her. A secondary tragedy of her treatment by the Senate was that it showed other survivors — past, present and future — what awaited them should they come forward.
Little wonder why generations of survivors of sexual assault, even in the midst of today’s #MeToo movement, hesitate to speak publicly about sexual assault. And many still do not report the attack for fear of being dismissed, diminished and decimated by a second attack on their character.
Fifth, Democrats must embrace Ford — support her, believe in her — just as Republicans in 1991 embraced Thomas. Kavanaugh has flatly denied that any such incident occurred, effectively labeling Ford a liar.
The White House and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell want to confirm Kavanaugh before the risk of a Senate turnover in the Nov. 6 midterm elections. They will attempt to ensure the vote. Democrats and thoughtful Republicans must not let that happen.
Finally, at the time of Anita Hill, there were only two women in the Senate: Nancy Kassebaum, R-Kansas, and Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. Neither served on the Judiciary Committee. Mikulski opposed Thomas. Kassebaum backed him but later regretted her vote.
Now there are two Republican women, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski and Maine’s Susan Collins, who could make the ultimate difference if they remember the lessons of Anita Hill. They are also senators who believed that Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., accused of sexual harassment, should not serve out his term. Kavanaugh, a judge, likely will continue his current lifetime appointment if he is not confirmed.
If we do not really hear Ford, what will it say to our daughters and our sons if we once again believe only him and not her? This is about more than the November elections. This is about more than whether the court bends left or right. This is about who we are, what values we uphold.
To paraphrase West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd who, after the Anita Hill hearing, reversed his previous support for Clarence Thomas: If one can’t decide, err on the side of the country, not the court.
This hearing is all about the country.