It wasn’t a “high-tech lynching” three decades ago, when the Senate Judiciary Committee considered Anita Hill’s allegations against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.
And it is not a high-tech lynching for the committee to debate the ethics of now-Justice Thomas’s behavior and consider what steps are needed to address the broader issue.
called the Thomas conversation a “shameful reprise of 1991’s high-tech lynching” and decried what he called a “political campaign designed to smear” the justice.
actually went to the tape, as though Thomas’s volcanic testimony in 1991 was somehow relevant to the ethics issue now.
Former federal judge Michael Luttig submitted written testimony for Tuesday’s hearing, and the conservative jurist got to the heart of the matter.
Ginsburg, in particular, was treated too gingerly for too long, as she rose from mere justice to cultural icon.
And for that matter, the current competition for ethics scoops risks drowning the truly problematic behavior in a sea of minor lapses, if that. »