SCOTUS nominee faces Senate judiciary committee

Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford testify in response to sexual assault allegations

Amy Inkrott / News Editor / The USD Vista

On Sept. 27, 2018, Brett Kavanaugh once again sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Previously, Kavanaugh’s hearings dealt with his judicial qualifications and opinions. However, Thursday’s hearing focused on Kavanaugh’s connection to the sexual assault allegations filed by Christine Blasey Ford, Ph.D.

In a letter to California Senator Dianne Feinstein, Ford claimed that the Supreme Court nominee had sexually assaulted her while at a party in high school. Ford maintained that Kavanaugh attempted to take her clothes off, and covered her mouth with his hand to prevent her from screaming. Ford, now 51, would have been 15 years old at the time of the alleged assault. Kavanaugh denied these allegations. 

Ford’s allegations were released to the public shortly after the conclusion of Kavanaugh’s initial hearings. Because of this, the Senate Judiciary Committee decided to postpone their vote to allow testimony from both Ford and Kavanaugh. Ford’s willingness to testify before the committee reminded many people of the confirmation of Justice Clarence Thomas.

President George H. W. Bush nominated judge Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court in 1991. Shortly after, Anita Hill, a law professor at the University of Oklahoma, filed sexual misconduct allegations against Thomas. She claimed the nominee often talked to her about pornographic films, the size of women’s’ breasts, and referred to himself as “Long Dong Silver.” Hill recalled the numerous inappropriate remarks Thomas had made to her as colleagues. However, despite these allegations, Thomas was confirmed by the Senate with a 52-48 vote. 

In 1991, the Senate Judiciary Committee was composed of 21 white male senators. The committee’s demographic raised questions about the hearing’s fairness, considering Hill’s identity as an African-American woman. Members of the committee referred to Hill as “a little nutty and a little slutty.” As a result, 1992 became known as “The Year of the Woman” as a larger number of women were elected to the senate. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee has four women representing the Democratic party. 

Senators Patrick Leahy, Orrin Hatch, and Chuck Grassley were three of the men on the committee at the time of the Anita Hill hearings, and were also present for Ford’s testimony.  Grassley now serves as chairman for the committee. Recalling Hill’s testimony, Grassley’s office decided to change the optics of the hearing, bringing in an outside litigator for Ford’s hearing. Rachel Mitchell, an Arizona female prosecutor who specializes in sex crime prosecutions, was tasked with questioning Ford. 

Sienna Todd, a sophomore international relations major, was frustrated with the role of Prosecutor Mitchell. 

“I think that the purpose of bringing in the outside prosecutor was strictly about optics and not about getting to the truth,” Todd said. “As soon as Kavanaugh started getting angry, the committee switched over to Senators asking him questions directly as opposed to continuing to allow the prosecutor to ask questions. It showed how little importance the Republican senators placed on her role, and therefore how little importance they placed on Dr. Ford’s testimony.”

The social climate surrounding sexual assault allegations has also shifted since the Anita Hill hearings. The rise of the #MeToo movement has brought greater public attention to instances of sexual misconduct. The movement has played a part in making some Americans sympathetic to Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh. 

Junior political science major Alessia Lo Cascio discussed the weaknesses of the movement, despite its growing prevalence. 

“The #MeToo movement has grown rapidly but it still has its limitations,” Lo Cascio said. “It seems that politicians are untouchable. Real progress has to be made, and that includes believing women and holding men accountable.”

Del Dickson, Ph.D., a political science professor at the University of San Diego, noted the importance of the social climate for the hearings. 

“The attitude of the country has changed significantly,” Dickson said. “If Thomas were trying to get on the Supreme Court today, there is not a chance that he would have been confirmed under these circumstances.”

Early last week, it was announced that the Senate Judiciary Committee intended to vote and recommend Kavanaugh on the day after the hearing. 

At the hearing on Thursday, Sept. 27, Ford went under oath and shared her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Early on, Ford denied claims that she was acting with partisan motives and emphasized her intent behind the allegations. 

“I am here today not because I want to be,” Ford said. “I am terrified. I am here because I believe it is my civic duty to tell you what happened to me while Brett Kavanaugh and I were in high school.”

Ford continued to describe the actions of Kavanaugh while at a high school party. She explained that a drunken Kavanaugh pinned her down and attempted to disrobe her. Having his hand over her mouth to prevent her from screaming, Ford expressed her fears that Kavanaugh was going to rape or accidentally kill her. Members of the committee questioned her about the details of the night, including the party’s location. Ford recalled the house’s stairwell and the layout of the bedroom she was locked in. When asked about her most enduring memory, Ford remembered Kavanaugh’s “uproarious laughter.” 

Ford was also asked about her Aug. 7 polygraph test regarding the events of the party. The test, administered by a former Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent, revealed that no parts of Ford’s statement were false or made up. However, the results of this exam were not considered to be corroborative evidence. 

For four hours, Mitchell and other members of the committee questioned the validity of Ford’s testimony. Ford said she was 100 percent certain that Kavanaugh had assaulted her.

Lo Cascio found Ford’s testimony difficult to watch. 

“Every woman knows someone who has been sexually assaulted, so it felt really personal,” Lo Cascio said. “I think we have a horrible problem in these sexual assault cases of putting the woman on trial and making her prove something instead of evaluating her testimony.”

During the hearing, calls to the National Sexual Assault hotline spiked by 201 percent, suggesting that viewers may have been triggered by Ford’s testimony. 

Kavanaugh began his time before the committee by continuing to deny Ford’s allegations. In his opening statement, Kavanaugh referred to the confirmation process as a “national disgrace” and rebuked members of the Democratic party. He continued to note the impact these claims have had on his family. 

“My family and my name have been totally and permanently destroyed by vicious and false additional allegations,” Kavanaugh said. 

Kavanaugh defended himself through his calendars from the year 1982, when the assault allegedly occurred. The nominee compared his calendars to a personal diary, as he kept detailed accounts of his location and the people with him. Referencing the calendars, Kavanaugh claimed he was not present at a party like the one described by Ford. Members of the committee continued to ask Kavanaugh about his previous experience with alcohol, noting items written in his high school yearbook.

Throughout the hearing, Kavanaugh repeatedly admitted to liking beer and having “too many” on occasion. When questioned about this, the nominee claimed he had never blacked out from drinking too much. However, this claim has been disputed by some of Kavanaugh’s former classmates. On multiple occasions, Kavanaugh avoided answering the senators’ questions surrounding excessive drinking by mentioning his athletic and academic achievements. 

The Ford-Kavanaugh hearings highlighted the partisan divide within the Senate. Near the end of Kavanaugh’s testimony, Republican Senator Lindsay Graham angrily addressed the Democratic members of the committee, labeling the hearings as “the most unethical sham” since he has been in politics. Seeing the allegations as an attempted Democratic power grab, Graham was sympathetic toward Kavanaugh. 

“I hate to say it because these have been my friends,” Graham said. “But let me tell you, when it comes to this, you’re looking for a fair process, you came to the wrong town at the wrong time, my friend.”

Throughout the hearing, many senators suggested an additional FBI investigation into the allegations. The proposed investigation would consider the testimony of other individuals involved. Deborah Ramirez, the other woman who filed sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh, would be included in this. However, Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected the idea of an additional investigation, citing a statement made by former Delaware Senator Joe Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. 

“The next person that refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn’t understand anything,” Biden said. “FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion. Period.”

Lo Cascio however, believes an FBI investigation would be beneficial in validating testimonies. 

“I don’t think the investigation is about finding the truth, it’s about finding enough evidence to cause reasonable doubt,” Lo Cascio said. “Brett Kavanaugh was nominated for one of the most important positions in our government. His appointment to the Supreme Court will change their vote for a generation. We have to take this seriously.”

On Friday, Sept. 28, Arizona Republican Senator Jeff Flake revealed he would not vote to recommend Kavanaugh unless an additional FBI investigation was opened. President Trump opened a limited investigation into the allegations, to be completed in less than a week. As a result the Senate Judiciary Committee voted with an 11-10 majority to recommend Kavanaugh to the larger senate. 

At this time, a full senate confirmation vote has not been scheduled, but is expected to occur in early October.