advertisement

SSN on Facebook SSN on Twitter SSN on YouTube RSS Feed

35 Comments
Columns

Clarence Thomas to Teach a Course at UF ... Still in the Shadow Anita Hill Casts

October 26, 2019 - 9:00am
Justice Clarence Thomas
Justice Clarence Thomas

The University of Florida Law School has risen in respect over time and that has earned the state school a high honor: The UF Levin College of Law will have a sitting Supreme Court justice teach a course in the Spring of 2020. Justice Clarence Thomas will lead a compressed course on the First Amendment as it pertains to religious clauses. 

This being controversial Justice Thomas, however, here come the voices of opposition demanding to be heard. The campus newspaper, The Independent Florida Alligator, ran a letter to the editor from a group of UF law students. They have formed a brand new group on campus called We Believe Survivors, and they declared this was founded in response to the welcoming of Justice Thomas. Reads a section of their letter:

“Anita Hill, 63, a woman of color and professor at Brandeis School of Law, inspired We Believe Survivors’ mission. Her courage in the face of adversity remains a beacon of strength. In 1991, she testified before Congress at the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Republicans opposed her. Democrats berated her. She detailed horrific acts of sexual misconduct perpetrated against her by her former boss, Thomas. Her words were not enough to change the minds of lawmakers, and Thomas was confirmed.”

Anita Hill in 1991
Anita Hill in 1991
Of primary concern in the complaint is the alluded-to culture of harassment said to be taking place on the UF campus. They also invoke Christine Blasey-Ford, the accuser who came forward in the Brett Kavanaugh hearing. Like Hill, Blasey-Ford’s testimony did not hold up at all in proving guilt. She could not even recollect what year her charge took place, as well as the myriad other issues with her testimony.

None of this is at all influenced by Thomas’ episode three decades ago, nor his appearance. These are students complaining about an incident that predates their birth, so any outrage here has to be muted to a degree. OK, credit to them for at least reading some of the details behind the confirmation of Judge Clarence Thomas. However, these are law students, and as such they should have at least a grasp of the basics of law and courtroom procedure.

Anita Hill’s allegations were not what can be called conclusive. She had never lodged a complaint about Judge Thomas prior to the confirmation. There was no corroboration from others, quotes she attributed to Thomas were found to be cribbed from popular culture, and her claims of being distraught and distrustful were contradicted by documentation that she was in regular contact with Thomas and sought out his support, which she had received. Her declarations of being set back were in contrast to her being helped along. The group however is operating on pure faith. “Levin administration either doesn’t believe Hill, or doesn’t care if her accusations are true. Both of those possibilities are unacceptable.”

How can they declare definitively that Hill’s accusations were “true”. Essentially, the evidence contradicted her testimony. Law students should have a grasp of the significance of this, as well as one other legal precept: presumption of innocence. Thomas is being declared “guilty” without a preponderance of evidence. Not only is reasonable doubt in play, it is unreasonable to state Anita Hill was accurate. 

One member of this new group did allude to the possible contradiction of their outrage not being modulated by the legal evidence. Dalia Figurado told Law.com that they were not effectively trying Justice Thomas as a guilty party. “It’s about holding our administration accountable and for them to acknowledge the concerns students may have.” So even if their outrage is misplaced, and not supported by facts, the concerns of the students take priority over the result.

In other words, their feelings outweigh the legal findings. It’s a good thing these students are still in school. They seem to have plenty left to learn about the law.

Brad Slager, a Fort Lauderdale freelance writer, wrote this story exclusively for Sunshine State News. He writes on politics and the industry and his stories appear in such publications as RedState and The Federalist.

Comments

Thomas is and always has been a stiff. He never should have been approved for the Supreme Court. (But - if Brett Kavanaugh got approved - the Senate is liable to approve anybody.)

It was a political lynching that Justice Thomas has to endure. The Dems have no shame.

Anita Hill got her 10 minutes of fame from the obvious lies she told.

I believe Hill and I believe that Thomas lied to himself about his less-than-perfect actions. Evidence becomes stale after time. Without significant corroboration, stale evidence is often useless because it is readily impeached with inconsistent statements or behaviors. I was similarly subjected to less-than-perfect behaviors after I began my legal career in an all-female environment some 30 years ago - complete with incessant male-bashing and lewd comments. Having grown up as a healthy, self-reliant male in a largely patriarchal society, however, it was not difficult for me to raise my concerns with management which led to creation of a sexual harassment policy statement. Having said my piece, Hill and Blasey Ford likely did more harm than good with their delayed disclosures. As a whole, however, it helps our society to revisit unsettling experiences from time to time in hopes of gleaning more lessons. Does Thomas, the individual, need to be singled out for more "education"?

Evil Woman offered Adam the Apple... and then forever denied it was an “offer”.

The evidence was “fresh” when it was pertinent, when it needed to be. And YOU, my dear are typical of the “me too” group, who will “ride ANY horse” to “get an edge”, and use ANY excuse to rationalize their failure to “ bring home an Attendance Trophy”...

I am making 10,000 Dollar at home own laptop .Just do work online 2 to 4 hour proparly . so i make my family happy and u can do ........ https://xurl.es/pdbyt

Nice going Hillary!

More Trumpy than Hillary.

Who is Anita Hill?

An activist democrat liar.

A black woman who was totally disregarded because she was black and a woman.

As an alumni of UF law school, while I might have philosophical differences w Justice Thomas, it certainly is a unique opportunity to be able to participate in this particular Constitutional Law course w a sitting Supreme Court Justice.

I am old enough to have lived through this matter and I never really examined it too closely. I took the time to read up a little on wiki----https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Hill---Anita Hill,---it seems to me that the not so honorable justice Thomas should step down from his high seat and become a legacy of what honorable men should do. Mr. Thomas should apologize and admit his less than decent behavior and if neither of them are married, he should propose marriage, what a fitting ending to such a bad story.

Get lost “1-Bill”; you, and your ignorant ilk just continue to clutter up society, always waiting for someone else to do your research and due diligence, always offhandedly maligning good people “in your stumbling path” along your way.

Nutty comment.

Maybe the truth doesn’t matter to you. Anyone going to the mainstream media for knowledge is bound to get a liberal biased viewpoint. Anita Hill came in forward at the last minute to make accusations against Justice Thomas that were not proven nor even substantiated. Innocent until proven guilty means nothing to you and your comments smearing Justice Thomas are deplorable.

Were you even born when the Clarence Thomas hearing took place???

Were you even born when the constitution was written?

try getting your information from some additional recognized legitimate sources . Lots was written back then and since. Do your reading in context of politics at that time . Democrats clearly hated the idea that a republican could nominate a well qualified black man as a justice of SCOTUS --the Democrat answer was to dig deep for dirt much of which was not true and if any of it was it was probably between two consenting adults . I watched the nauseating hearings . His teaching a course at UF on the first amendment is a wonderful opportunity for UF law students and faculty .

Maybe some minds will open; just maybe,

6 Pieces Of Evidence Anita Hill Was Lying: https://www.dailywire.com/news/6-pieces-evidence-anita-hill-was-lying-amanda-prestigiacomo

Anita Hill lied for political reasons. She should self-deport herself from my country.

On what basis do you conclude that "Anita Hill lied for political purposes"? Sean Hannity tell you? Or, maybe Rush Limbaugh? LOL

Perhaps read something more than wikipedia before drawing a conclusion.

Perhaps...could you point me in the correct direction from where I could get more accurate information?###Or I could ignore the whole matter and pretend that such things a sexual harassment never really occur and the whole thing is just made up in the victims mind.

The clowns that don't believe Blasey-Ford don't believe Anita Hill. Purely puerile partisanship.

Who on Earth cares what YOU think “1-Bill” (You’re always late to the issue at hand anyway)

What made it obvious that Hill was lying was the grotesque nature of some of her charges. Until these statements about “pubic hairs on Cokes” and having a closed room session talking about porn movies, her story was a nothing burger, which wouldn’t have derailed an appointment to assistant dogcatcher. So she had to make up more extreme charges But these charges were ludicrous; the kind of thing that would have been laughed out of any kangaroo court on the planet. Who but a lunatic would think “Who put a pubic hair on my Coke was funny.” And outside of Travis Bickle in “Taxi Driver”, who would use porn movies as an opening gambit in seducing anybody, except for a crack whore? And all this was thrown at a guy who was such a goody two shoes that the only dirt that they could throw at him was that he laughed one time when hearing the name “Long *** Silver” (He didn’t bring that subject up* himself, he reacted to it) And Who wouldn’t have laughed at that? Billy Graham would have laughed at “Long *** Silver”. So the only way this could be remotely believable is if Thomas had some pathological weakness for scrawny, high strung, ultra liberal black women. Which is possible seeing as how he soon married a chubby, mild mannered, conservative, red Irish woman …. ie, the absolute polar opposite of Anita Hill

Plenty of people - like Thomas (and Kavanaugh) are capable of "grotesque". Donald Trump does "grotesque" every day - and especially at his rallies! (And, note: Anita Hill passed a lie detector test.)

Pages

Add new comment

columns
advertisement
advertisement

Chatterbox

advertisement
Live streaming of WBOB Talk Radio, a Sunshine State News Radio Partner.

advertisement
advertisement