The quest to confirm President Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, has just became even more controversial. Christine Ford, a Psychology Professor at Palo Alto University, California, came forward publicly with allegations that around 30 years ago, Kavanaugh, sexually assaulted her. She asserts that as teenagers, they had met at a house party where Kavanaugh, who was drunk, took her up into a bedroom (with his friend) where he proceeded to hold her down, cover her mouth from screaming, and grope her as his friend watched. Eventually, she would escape, but she claims the event caused serious emotional trauma. Senate Republicans and the White House have responded by comparing this to Anita Hill's accusations against Justice Thomas years ago, saying that it's a partisan hit-job from registered-Democrat Ford. Furthermore, the White House released a letter from 65 women Kavanugh knew in high school that all agree Kavanaugh treated women, "with decency and respect." Democrats such as Dianne Feinstein responded, claiming that this accusation should disqualify him from being confirmed. Kavanaugh himself has denied the accusation completely. Some Republican Senators such as Jeff Flake have come out and said that they don't feel comfortable voting for Kavanaugh until Ford testifies her case to the Senate. Other Republicans are saying that The claims are bogus since this is the sixth time in 20 years that Kavanaugh has been vetted by the FBI and the first time this incident has been brought to light. Democrats point to the fact that a retired FBI agent polygraphed Ford and said there was no deception indicated.
1. Do you think that the Senate should vote now on Kavanaugh's nomination (since this issue is dividing the country), or should they wait until the mid-term elections (which Republicans are projected to keep control of the Senate in)?
2. What similarities does this situation have with the Anita Hill sexual misconduct accusation of Justice Clarence Thomas?
1. I think their should be no form of delay in deciding if Kavanaugh is a Justice or not. Postponing his possible nomination could result in what occured with the republicans with Obama's justice nominee.
ReplyDelete2. Both times we see a powerful man placed under a strict eye based on possible past behavior. Though the Anita Hill case had more legitimate evidence.
Karina Mori
ReplyDelete1. I think that the Senate should delay the vote for Kavanaugh until it is sure that he is a good nominee. Since his term is lifetime, it is very important that his nomination is full and is thoughtful.
2. The Kavanaugh trial has many similarities with the Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas trial. I think it's interesting that both women are very well-educated and intelligent. However, Anita Hill most likely had more sufficient evidence and was even more unfair than Dr. Ford.
CHARLIE:
ReplyDelete1. The senate should vote immediately on Brett kavanaugh. It is wrong to allow unsubstantiated allegations to upend the nomination of a fully qualified and moral individual such as Judge Kavanuagh. It reflects poorly on the morals of the Senate Democrats spearheading the attacks.
2. The case is very simialr to the Anita Hill case. Both times, the left weaponized weak allegations to try to keep a conservative off the bench. As Clarence Thomas described it, these are "high tech lynchings."
1) If it is a matter of dividing the country, Brett Kavanaugh should be voted by the Senate. As a man running for the Supreme Court he is well qualified (ABA).
ReplyDelete2) Very similar to the Anita Hill case. Same applies to both regarding the issue.