When judge Brett Kavanaugh, who has so far been accused of sexual assault by three women, was officially confirmed to the Supreme Court on October 6, few were surprised; political decisions today are fueled by partisan loyalty, not genuine belief. But with the vote to confirm Kavanaugh, senators have told women in America, especially women in high school, that their experiences do not matter.
It’s hard to even imagine the courage it must have taken for Christine Blasey Ford, who came forward with allegations that Kavanaugh drunkenly pinned her down on a bed at a high school party in the 1980s, with his hand over her mouth, attempting to undress her before she managed to get away, to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about her assault, with the eyes of the nation watching her every move.
However, her testimony was little but a roadblock for the 49 Republican senators, and one Democratic senator, who ended up voting yes. Nothing has changed in this MeToo era, where women’s voices are supposed to mean something. Many Republicans questioned why Ford had waited so long to come forward, apparently not realizing the risks that come with accusing a powerful white man of sexual assault. Ford told the Washington Post after revealing her identity, “I feel my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and my terror about retaliation.”
When Kavanaugh took the stand, it seemed less like a judge undergoing questioning than a guilty man trying to yell his innocence into existence. In an opening statement nearly 45 minutes long, Kavanaugh exhibited behavior that was far from judicial, growing aggressive, in contrast to the alleged victim who was poised, if tearful. Kavanaugh painted himself as a victim, stating that the allegations were nothing more than “a calculated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election.” Kavanaugh clearly displayed partisan bias.
One thing that seemed to go unacknowledged during the confirmation process was that Kavanaugh was not under criminal prosecution. His review by the Senate was, basically, a job interview, albeit a very important, long-lasting, country-changing job. What kind of employer would hire someone who has been accused of sexual assault at such a public level?
Kavanaugh’s belligerent and disrespectful nature towards many of the senators who questioned him should have been a disqualifying factor on its own. He dodged questions throughout the hearing, with one particularly thoughtless response coming after Senator Amy Klobuchar asked Kavanaugh if he had ever blacked out drinking, to which he responded, “I don’t know. Have you?”
His performance at the hearing was so appalling that it prompted over 2,400 law professors to sign an open letter published in the New York Times October 3, and presented to the Senate October 4, urging senators to rethink confirmation. “Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land,” the letter, titled “The Senate Should Not Confirm Kavanaugh,” read.
I do not know one woman in my life who has never been subject to some kind of harassment or assault. With Kavanaugh’s lifelong confirmation to a court that has so long been known for its impartiality and fairness, every woman can assume that their voice will be drowned out by the deafening sexism that still penetrates all aspects of our society. High school-aged women can assume their experiences will be discounted because of their age and the “boys will be boys” excuse that sexual predators have often hidden behind. The women meant to lead the nation in the future are being taught to stay silent, lest they be subjected to disbelief and more abuse.
Progress is slow, and the most important battles are not easily won. But the United States government should be able to recognize the outcry of the people and consider it with more than a meaningless, week-long FBI investigation, proposed by Arizona Senator Jeff Flake only to save face in the wake of several protests. It is deeply disappointing to see such a regressive decision being made in a time where so many aim to be progressive, but all revolutions are fueled by injustice.
