My "Man of the Year" for 1991

The nomination of John Roberts to fill O'Connor's seat at the Supreme Court seems to be dominating the news these days, and I think I can understand the media's obsession with the topic. For my own part, I've been giving a lot of thought to how the confirmation hearings will play out, given that the Democrats seem bound and determined to give him the grilling of his life. I mean, consider Chuck Schumer's beef that, during his confirmation to the appellate bench, Roberts declined to answer a question about which Supreme Court cases he disagreed with (a question, by the way, Orrin Hatch called "dumb" on the record). Now he's determined to get an answer, and he's not going to let anyone get in his way.

But to bring myself back from a ramble, the thing that's been occupying my mind lately is not Roberts' judicial opinions or the diversity of the court or anything quite so topical; instead, I've been replaying the Clarence Thomas hearings in my brain. I fear for a repeat.

Anita Hill, interestingly enough, has become something of an icon, a woman who could stand up to the pressure of a Senate inquiry into her personal life without breaking. And, I guess, from this limited standpoint, maybe there's something to that. But it should also be remembered that she was a woman whose flimsy story, contradicted by her own coworkers and supported by nothing other than her word, almost brought the career of an otherwise respected jurist to a disgraceful end. Here was a woman who admitted being told by Senate staffers that all she had to do was make a private allegation, and Thomas's confirmation would be derailed. Once things went public, the Senate did the "noble" thing, putting her on national television so she could tell her story, for story it was.

I still don't know for sure that she was lying, but I'm not sure it matters. There was no evidence for her assertion, no credible supporting witnesses, and a vast bulk of people and exhibits telling the opposite story--and the Senate thought it wise to put her on the national stage and let her go.

And so we come, at length, to the real reason I decided to post today: to say a belated thank you to John Doggett. You may not remember him, but he was the witness who came up late in the hearings and--in addition to contradicting several of her statements on the record--alleged that Hill was a jealous woman, one who'd once pursued him and harbored a grudge when he rejected her. The transcript seems dry now, but I confess that at the time I was riveted by the man's testimony. He was so intense, so sincere, that I could not help but believe him. And if I had any doubt, it was erased when Democratic committee member Howard Metzenbaum tried to destroy Doggett's credibility in a particularly blackguardly way--by using the unsworn testimony of one Amy Grant to raise the possibility that Doggett himself had sexually harrassed women (allegations Doggett vociferously denied)...not, of course, that any of that was relevant to the Thomas matter. I quote from the transcript:

SENATOR BIDEN: Excuse me, let me interrupt for a minute.

MR. DOGGETT: I'm pissed off, sir.

SENATOR BIDEN: It is totally out of line with what the committee had agreed to--

MR. DOGGETT: I'm sorry.

SENATOR BIDEN: --for there to be entered into this record any unsworn statement by any witness who cannot be called before this committee, and I rule any such statement out of order.

Now, I apologize for being out of the room. Was there any--

SENATOR METZENBAUM: I was only reading from Mr. Doggett's own statement.

MR. DOGGETT: My statement was not under oath, sir. That was a telephone conversation and they said we staffers would like to talk with you, we have a court reporter there. I'm a lawyer, sir, it was no deposition, it was not under oath, as Ms. Graham's comments were not under oath. And since you have brought this up, I demand the right to clear my name, sir.

SENATOR METZENBAUM: I was only reading from his statement, not from--

MR. DOGGETT: I demand the right to clear my name, sir. I have been trashed for no reason by somebody who does not even have the basic facts right. This is what is going on with Clarence Thomas, and now I, another person coming up, has had a "witness" fabricated at the last moment to try to keep me from testifying.

SENATOR METZENBAUM: Well, Mr. Doggett--

MR. DOGGETT: I am here, I don't care, she is wrong, and I would like to be able to clear my name, sir.

So I wish today, belatedly, to take my hat off to Mr. John Doggett, J.D., for standing his ground before a hostile Senate committee, for having the courage to come forward in the first place (when he had nothing to gain and very much to lose), and for displaying to the world what a sham those hearings really were. I pray that, when the time comes and the inevitable old bandmate of John Roberts surfaces to air some dirty laundry, we will at least take a considered whiff before hanging it on the national line.