If there was ever any question about the significance of Clarence Thomas' place in American history, it has been answered in recent months. Few individuals carry such influence and intrigue that the mere possibility of their presence can spark a frenzy. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thomas has a secure place in this select group.
The announcement late last year that Thomas would be the commencement speaker at the University of Georgia School of Law graduation immediately sparked debate, inflamed emotions and brought calls for protest. The furor subsided for a few months, but, as Saturday's graduation draws closer, it has returned with a vengeance.
In late April, 11 faculty members and 50 students signed a petition which helped revive the debate over Thomas. The petition read, ''We, as students, faculty and staff of he law school, have placed our signatures below to express our objection to the process and result of this year's commencement speaker. The process was under-inclusive, clandestine and divisive. The result, too, is divisive and is disrespectful of a substantial number of graduating students and their families.''
It's somewhat amusing to hear lawyers complain about the divisiveness of a situation. Makes you wonder whether they picked the right line of work. Few professions encounter or even create more differences in opinion than the law. If some of the lawyers-in-training at the university are offended by a little dissent over a graduation speaker, how will they cope when pitted against other attorneys in a trial or negotiation?
As for this criticism of the selection process, the issues are legitimate, but the motivation certainly seems suspect. Last year, three student leaders approached David Shipley, dean of the law school, about inviting Thomas to give the graduation address. At the time the law school had only an informal process for selecting commencement speakers. Sometimes students would make suggestions, other years it was left up to the dean to decide who to invite.
Given the lack of outrage in previous years, it seems this process of choosing graduation speakers didn't ruffle too many feathers before. It was only when the invitation was given to a firebrand whose remarks might not follow the typically staid commencement mold that people suddenly started complaining about the selection process.
As a result of this uproar, a more formal process for choosing speakers was established for future graduations. Students in the graduating class will be invited to make nominations, which will then be discussed by a committee of representatives from all law school student organizations. The committee then will compile a short list of nominees, and the dean will make the final decision.
While these revisions should improve the selection process - if nothing else by taking some of the pressure off the dean - we hope they don't prevent outspoken or controversial individuals from being invited. Some of the most provocative and influential people hold opinions that challenge our way of thinking and evoke passionate and often contrary reactions. If this new process results in bland speakers who say only what people want to hear, then its inclusiveness at one end will lead to exclusion at the other.
As a native Georgian and member of the nation's highest court, Thomas' selection as commencement speaker for UGA's law school graduation is not only appropriate, but may also make the event more memorable. Yet, his remarks need not win over the entire audience for the speech to be successful. Certainly those who often disagree with him shouldn't expect this day to be different. The most important thing any commencement speech can do is make people think. If Justice Thomas achieves that goal, then the tumultuous months leading up to his address will have been worthwhile.
Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on Friday, May 16, 2003.