News
Harvard Quietly Resolves Anti-Palestinian Discrimination Complaint With Ed. Department
News
Following Dining Hall Crowds, Harvard College Won’t Say Whether It Tracked Wintersession Move-Ins
News
Harvard Outsources Program to Identify Descendants of Those Enslaved by University Affiliates, Lays Off Internal Staff
News
Harvard Medical School Cancels Class Session With Gazan Patients, Calling It One-Sided
News
Garber Privately Tells Faculty That Harvard Must Rethink Messaging After GOP Victory
Two academics, a feminist activist and a state Republican Party official squared off Wednesday night at a Kennedy School of Government forum, arguing over the just-concluded confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The panelists, who drew a crowd of more than 200 to the Institute of Politics event, agreed that Anita Hill's charge of sexual harassment was handled poorly by the Senate.
Anne Lewis, chair of the Commission for Women's Equality, said that the hearings had the effect of trivializing and "trashing" sexual harrassment as an issue and Anita Hill as an individual.
Lewis, who added that she felt Hill would have been treated more fairly by a committee of women, went on to criticize President Bush for presenting Thomas as the best candidate for the job.
Bush 'Lied'
Glen Loury, a former Kennedy School professor currently teaching at Boston University, said that Bush "lied" in saying that Thomas was more qualified than other candidates.
"Bush should have distinguished between creating quotas and encouraging diversity on the Supreme Court," Loury said.
Loury ultimately praised Thomas, however, saying that he will represent Americans well.
"Mr. Thomas will serve the court and the country with honor and distinction in the years ahead," Loury said.
Alan Safran, spokesperson for the Massachusetts Republican Party, said he believed that the Senate was right in confirming Thomas, since he was not proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt."
But Professor of Law Christopher Edley said that he did not think proof beyond a reasonable doubt was necessary for Thomas's rejection.
"The nominee has a hard burden of proving that he deserves to be on the high court," Edley said.
Edley added that the Senate hearings were "very problematic," both before and after Anita Hill's allegations were taken up.
Safran also harshly criticized the Senate Democrats, whom he said had likely leaked Hill's allegations to the press.
"The perpetrator should be dismissed from the Senate," Safran said.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.