Oprah Recruits Sexual Harassment Accusers For Pro Bono Representation

O, The Oprah Magazine ^ | July 2, 2005 | L.N. Smithee

[L.N. Smithee]

From the article "Anita Hill's After Story" in the July 2005 issue of O, The Oprah Magazine:

[Anita Hill's] moment in the news may not be over yet. An appointment to the Supreme Court is for life, so Thomas's position is safe. With Chief Justice William Rehnquist possibly stepping down after the session ends in late June, however, court watchers wonder who might replace him. When previously asked about federal judicial appointments, Bush has said he would select judges like Thomas and Antonin Scalia, indicating a preference for such conservatives. That leads people to wonder whether Thomas might get the nod for chief justice. Hill would like to think that the president will not make that choice. "I think he realizes that he's going to have some battles and this one may not even be worth it," she says. "And I don't know that even Karl Rove is willing to take this one on." Still, Bush has proved himself disinterested in the notion of conserving political capital for a later date, and Thomas was his father's man.

[L.N. Smithee]

I don't know what the interval is between the conceptualization of Oprah's magazine to the day it hits the newsstands, but I think it would be safe to presume that the impetus for Oprah's re-discovering of Anita Hill were the rumors that President Bush might want Clarence Thomas to replace the ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

While talk of Thomas getting the Chief Justice nod has dissipated, and it is generally assumed that Justice Antonin Scalia will be chosen when Rehnquist either retires or dies (whichever comes first), it looks like Oprah didn't want to take a chance. To that end, the concluding paragraph of the article on what Anita Hill's up to now reads as follows:

Do you believe you are a victim of sexual harassment at work? Share your story. If your story qualifies, it may be selected by a law firm for pro bono representation and featured in O, The Oprah Magazine.

The link goes to a legal definition of sexual harassment, and a subsequent link goes to a 14-point questionnaire.

The O article only promises that there will be reports on the progress of whichever suit is selected in the magazine; it doesn't say anything about Oprah, the television show. But mark my words; if serious talk of Thomas being nominated for Chief Justice is revived, we will likely see Hill return to prominence on an Oprah show hyped to the hilt, ready and willing to aide and abet the enemies of Clarence Thomas all over again.

By the way: George Herbert Walker Bush nominated Judge Thomas fourteen years ago yesterday -- July 1, 1991.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

[Sgt_Schultze]

Anita Hill lied. Her chief source of corroboration, judge Hoertsner lied confirming the time line. We know that because Hill's advisor, now the governess of Arizona, Janet Napolitano, encouraged Hoertsner to lie. Napolitano sat in during Hoertsner's deposition.

Hoertsner's confident reply to a question about a telephone call from Hill made it impossible to have involved Thomas. Napolitano stopped the deposition to confer. Upon return, Hoertsner's recollection had been refreshed to the point that she developed amnesia about dates which would clear Thomas.

Sickening wombats.

[bd476]

The law firm:

Why Work for Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates

How does Skadden stand out from other firms?

The summer associate program

The only thing better than being a summer associate is being a Skadden, Arps summer assocate. Our summer associate program offers outstanding students the chance to learn firsthand about our firm, its practices and the people who make it special. more

It's the People.

Extraordinarily talented attorneys from many different backgrounds and with many different interests, located in 22 offices around the world, are linked together every day through joint efforts, common goals, and advanced technology. The students and attorneys we hire are the best and the brightest from throughout the world, representing more than 120 law schools and 17 countries.

At Skadden, Arps, these attorneys are friendly, helpful, trusted colleagues who enjoy what they do. They are the people who make us unique.

We Go for the Gold.

The attorneys of Skadden, Arps share one common denominator: a desire to be the best at what they do. Our goal is not merely to be excellent; the goal is to be the best - like the athletes at the Olympics, striving for the Gold medal. Skadden, Arps has more people in more practice areas who are considered to be the best in the world at what they do.

Collegiality.

The secret of our success is teamwork: we do the biggest, toughest deals by tackling them as a team, coordinating resources and expertise from around the world. We work well together and we have fun working together.

The Training.

In addition to the hands-on experience of working and interacting directly with partners and clients, Skadden attorneys participate in the firm's highly regarded and expanding training and development programs. Skadden's New York and California offices are accredited providers of in-house continuing legal education programs. In 2001, the New York office alone provided more than 170 training programs.

These programs in all offices include seminars in all areas of our corporate, banking, real estate, finance, and restructuring and bankruptcy reorganization practices. There are also litigation programs that review trial advocacy, deposition skills, legal writing and presentation skills.

Skadden-trained lawyers are well-respected throughout the profession as well as in the industries we serve. The training received by associates in their early years at Skadden serves them well throughout their careers, whether they remain at the firm or eventually pursue other career paths.

The Work.

With unrivaled depth and breadth across a range of practice areas, Skadden, Arps is consistently at the forefront of groundbreaking legal issues, from the largest M&A deals to bet-the-company litigation to the farthest-reaching project finance transactions. In the past year alone, Skadden attorneys have been involved with a string of headline matters, including serving as special counsel to Enron Corporation, handling the bankruptcy of Kmart Corporation, defending securities fraud claims against McKesson HBOC, Inc. and representing the auction house Christie's in its grand jury investigation.

Skadden's diversified corporate practice ranked in the top 10 in 11 different categories in The American Lawyer's April 2001 Corporate Scorecard survey. And Skadden has long been a fixture in the world's most complex and significant M&A transactions, including representing Mannesman AG in its $199 billion acquisition by Vodafone AirTouch Plc, the largest takeover in corporate history; Warner-Lambert Company in its $90.3 billion acquisition by Pfizer Inc., the world's largest pharmaceutical-industry deal to date; Mobil Corporation in its $86.4 billion merger with Exxon Corporation, the world's largest energy-industry deal to date; Travelers Group in its $72.6 billion merger with Citicorp, the world's largest financial services deal to date; and Daimler-Benz AG in its $40.5 billion merger with Chrysler Corporation, the world's largest auto-industry deal to date.

Why Work for Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates

[thoughtomator]

The information at that link is an outright falsehood. It confuses gender discrimination with sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is, well, sexual... gender discrimination is not necessarily sexual.

Here's the key difference: gender discrimination doesn't need an overt component. Sexual harassment does.

By confusing the two, that page is encouraging women to make false accusations of sexual harassment whenever they "feel" like they are being discriminated against because they are female.

The truth of the matter is that almost all working women blame some of the obstacles that they encounter on male bigotry. Some do so habitually. Most often, it is not true and they are simply facing an obstacle that any other person would face in the same professional position.

To encourage women to then take it further and file (false) sexual harassment claims is simply an act of war against men, designed to sunder what little harmony there is left in society.

[Clock King]

Most people still don't get it, but back in 1989, everyone in my local Black community knew (ie, logically guessed) what the deal was with Anita Hill: it was an affair gone bad. That's it. That's all it was. Hill and Thomas, both Republican, both black, both working together long nights. Both unmarried at the time. Come on, EVERYBODY could see what happened. But Thomas probably just "wasn't that into her." The woman had a broken heart and would have let it go, but then Thomas came up for the Justice position, and all of that anger came back.

[Ciexyz]

btt

[Gay State Conservative]

Has anybody ever hear a single cry of protest from Oprah or any other progressive in this country regarding the claims made by Juanita Broderick? I certainly haven't!

I've always wondered why. (/sarcasm)

[thoughtomator]

Should have her sign up and see what the result is.

[Waco]

Yes! I've been harassed! And it was Bill Clinton who did it! Help me! Help me! Help me! Help me! Help me! Help me!

[Slings and Arrows]

Has anybody ever hear a single cry of protest from Oprah or any other progressive in this country regarding the claims made by Juanita Broderick?

Apparently rape is OK if the rapist supports the privilege of killing any by-products.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

I remember the hearings like they were yesterday. I watched or listened to every second of the 3 days as the committee re-opened testimony to hear Hill, then Thomas and then a parade of corroborating witnesses.

Other than the fact that it would be absurd for this "assertive, independent woman" to have followed Thomas from one department to another if he was harassing her, I recall some interesting obfuscation regarding the circumstances under which she left the D.C. firm she worked for upon graduation from Yale Law School - whence she came to work for Thomas.

The most critical detail was something that happened in the early evening on Saturday of the three days of extended hearings. As I recall Thomas testified in the morning, declaring the hearings to be a "high tech lynching", and then a variety of witnesses testified through the afternoon and through the day on Sunday. Several senators supporting Hill held an impromptu press conference in the hallway outside the hearings - indicating that Hill had passed a polygraph examination and that this indicated she was telling the truth. They never released the full transcript of the questions and answers and the data which led them to make this statement. Since polygraph information is inadmissible in a court - people are free to make whatever claims they want about a privately administered polygraph examination. If Hill reappears - she needs to do a full polygraph with complete disclosure of the results, conditions and raw data from the examination.

I still do not believe her.

[vpintheak]

Nothing about Bill, huh hOprah?

[eccentric]

Juanita Broderick?

Paula Jones? Kathleen Willey? Linda Tripp?

[eccentric]

Perhaps they should begin their recruiting in the break rooms for the aids of Democrat Senators.