Women from U of T Law reflect on recent SCOTUS appointment
“It would indeed have been more comfortable for Ford to remain silent. The fact that she did not remain silent is an incredible act of bravery, and those of us who understand that have a duty to keep her story alive.”
When Anita Hill testified on sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas in 1991, she told the Senate Judiciary Committee that “it would have been more comfortable to remain silent.”
Nearly three decades later, Dr Christine Blasey Ford brought credible claims of sexual assault to the same committee. She told them that nominee Justice Brett Kavanaugh had tried to rape her when they were both in high school. Dr Ford spent hours recounting it all in excruciating detail: how she felt Justice Kavanaugh put his hand over her mouth to stop her from screaming, how she heard his drunken laughter as she tried to cry for help, how she feared he would accidentally kill her.
After endless public dissection of Dr Ford’s claims, a superficial four-day FBI “investigation,” and President Donald Trump’s voracious ridicule of Ford’s statements, Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed to the bench.
Like Clarence Thomas has been since 1991, Kavanaugh is now a permanent fixture of the Supreme Court bench. Many of us are just beginning to process how we feel about his nomination to the court, and we have the next few decades to do so, at 53 years old and with no obligations to retire, he isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.
It would indeed have been more comfortable for Dr Ford to remain silent. The fact that she did not remain silent is an incredible act of bravery, and those of us who understand that have a duty to keep her story alive.
I have compiled here perspectives on the Kavanaugh hearings from female U of T Law students, professors, and alumni. While the conversation on the hearings is far from over, the collective power of these statements speaks for itself.
On the treatment of sexual violence survivors
“As a female law student, and a survivor of sexual violence myself, the Kavanaugh testimony concerns me. I want to work in a system that I trust and would feel comfortable bringing my claim forward in—whether that be in a criminal context or a complaint against a co-worker. Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony, like many recent Canadian examples, is another strike against the justice system and its actors as a means to adequately condemn and punish sexual violence in either of these contexts.”
—Shelby Rooney (1L)
“If anyone was going to have a chance to persuade the panel that she was telling the truth it was Dr. Ford — a white, educated, professional, upper-middle class, married mother. She was the ‘perfect’ witness and was very credible. And still, the man in the room held all the power. While I hoped for a different outcome, I knew deep down the confirmation would go through.”
—Erin Cowling (Lecturer, Legal Research and Writing)
“Even with a perfect victim, people don’t believe, and that is because they don’t want to believe. Because sexism, toxic masculinity, and white supremacy is woven into the foundation of our society and to believe survivors (both men and women) is to accept that these structures themselves must be reevaluated.”
—Tali Chernin (3L)
“I do think that women should be believed in these situations. I don’t think they should be believed to the exclusion of the opportunity for men to defend themselves, but I think that innate belief should lead the process to be more humane and dignified for the women involved.”
—Daryna Kutsyna (2L)
On the legitimacy of the appointment process
“The politicization of judicial appointments… [is a] real crisis for the rule of law and the confidence people need that there is a place to go outside the political maelstrom for fair, neutral decisions… If people don’t think the law is above politics, then our systems of politics, which depend on there being non-political, legal constraints on how politics is conducted, are under real threat.”
—Professor Gillian Hadfield
“I do not think that a prosecutor belonged in that hearing. Nor do I think that Kavanaugh should be treated as innocent until proven guilty. Both points would be expected if applied in a court setting, but a nomination hearing should involve senators’ questioning and a goal of determined the candidate’s character, temperament, and suitability for the position.”
—Leah Krakowitz (1L)
“The reality is that [the Senate Judiciary Committee’s] process was never designed to address these kinds of issues. Unsurprisingly, it did not function very well… One of the things that is incredibly clear coming out of Kavanaugh, if nothing else, is that this is not the way to appoint judges.”
—Professor Mayo Moran (SJD ‘99, first female Dean of U of T Law)
On Kavanaugh’s lifetime job
“It’s a step that should make everybody, in particular, all lawyers, quake with fear… We now have a member of the Supreme Court of the United States who clearly does not care about truth for its own sake, and will abuse it when it suits his own private purpose.”
—Professor Denise Réaume
“To be that evasive, rude, and partisan should simply be against the hard selection criteria for a judge… I am disheartened that a developed judicial system would allow a candidate with that kind of behaviour to become a judge—even a lawyer.”
—Rachael Girolametto-Prosen (1L)
“Not only does he have a job for life; he’s got a job for life that gives him extraordinary power over the persons and bodies of all the women in that nation… To me, it’s an incredible disregard for women, the stories of women, the autonomies of women.”
—Gillian Hnatiw (LLB ‘02, Partner at Adair Goldblatt Bieber LLP)
