7,365
edits
Clarence Thomas Supreme Court nomination (edit)
Revision as of 13:14, 15 August 2023
, 15 August 2023Removed empty portal template using script
Flying Bee (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Short description|United States Supreme Court nomination}} {{Use mdy dates|date=October 2017}} File:Thomaseeoc.jpg|right|thumb|Official portrait of Clarence Thomas as chai...") |
m (Removed empty portal template using script) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
===Testimony and statements in support of Thomas=== | ===Testimony and statements in support of Thomas=== | ||
In addition to Hill and Thomas, the Judiciary heard from several other witnesses over the course of three days, on October | In addition to Hill and Thomas, the Judiciary heard from several other witnesses over the course of three days, on October 11–13, 1991.<ref name=CRS-R44234/> Several witnesses testified in support of Clarence Thomas and rebutted Hill’s testimony. Phone logs were also submitted into the record showing contact between Hill and Thomas in the years after she left the EEOC.<ref>[https://archive.today/20120713194012/http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new-yitna?id=UsaThom&images=images/modeng&data=/lv6/workspace/yitna&tag=public&part=24 Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing], October 11, 1991</ref> | ||
Among those testifying on behalf of then-Judge Thomas was J.C. Alvarez, a woman who for four years was Thomas’ special assistant at EEOC. Alvarez said that “[t]he Anita Hill I knew before was nobody’s victim.” Alvarez went on to say that Thomas “demanded professionalism and performance.” According to Alvarez, Thomas would not tolerate “the slightest hint of impropriety, and everyone knew it.” Alvarez asserted that Hill’s allegations were a personal move on her part to advance her own interests: “Women who have really been harassed would agree, if the allegations were true, you put as much distance as you can between yourself and that other person. What’s more, you don't follow them to the next job – especially, if you are a black female, Yale Law School graduate. Let’s face it, out in the corporate sector, companies are fighting for women with those kinds of credentials.”<ref>[http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~ybf2u/Thomas-Hill/1013a05.html Thomas hearings] {{webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20120630210057/http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~ybf2u/Thomas-Hill/1013a05.html |date=June 30, 2012 }}, October 13, 1991.</ref> | Among those testifying on behalf of then-Judge Thomas was J.C. Alvarez, a woman who for four years was Thomas’ special assistant at EEOC. Alvarez said that “[t]he Anita Hill I knew before was nobody’s victim.” Alvarez went on to say that Thomas “demanded professionalism and performance.” According to Alvarez, Thomas would not tolerate “the slightest hint of impropriety, and everyone knew it.” Alvarez asserted that Hill’s allegations were a personal move on her part to advance her own interests: “Women who have really been harassed would agree, if the allegations were true, you put as much distance as you can between yourself and that other person. What’s more, you don't follow them to the next job – especially, if you are a black female, Yale Law School graduate. Let’s face it, out in the corporate sector, companies are fighting for women with those kinds of credentials.”<ref>[http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~ybf2u/Thomas-Hill/1013a05.html Thomas hearings] {{webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20120630210057/http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~ybf2u/Thomas-Hill/1013a05.html |date=June 30, 2012 }}, October 13, 1991.</ref> | ||
| Line 364: | Line 364: | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
* [[George H. W. Bush Supreme Court candidates]] | * [[George H. W. Bush Supreme Court candidates]] | ||