October 4, 2018

As attorneys and advocates for survivors of sexual harm, we are deeply disappointed by the process the Senate is using to continually advance Judge Brett Kavanaugh towards a seat on the Supreme Court. Our opposition to his confirmation is not based on partisan political philosophy or in our expectations about his future positions. It is rooted in our belief that survivors deserve to be heard, fairly and fully.

The Senate’s refusal to direct the FBI to conduct a full background investigation was disrespectful not only to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez, but all survivors who have bravely spoken up. They do so at great risk to themselves, often facing lasting consequences for telling the truth. The Senate has signaled to them, and those who have not yet shared their experience of sexual harm, that the risk is not worth it. That their pain and the damaging actions of their abusers don’t matter.

The legitimacy of our country’s highest court is at stake. Determining whether someone should serve as a Justice is one of the Senate’s most impactful decisions, with far-reaching and long-lasting consequences. Whoever is confirmed will determine many of our fundamental rights and protections – from options involving our healthcare to criminal justice standards to discrimination in the workplace and schools. Judge Brett Kavanaugh has shown us he is unfit for this appointment. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez have told us. His former classmates and peers have, too. Now it’s time to tell our Senators to vote ‘no’ on his confirmation.

Some argue that Kavanaugh deserves the benefit of the doubt, is innocent until proven guilty, or that the allegations have not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Those of us who are attorneys understand that none of those standards ought to apply. The confirmation hearings were not a criminal trial, but a chance to determine whether Kavanaugh has demonstrated his suitability to serve for a lifetime on the Supreme Court. His unprofessional, dishonest, partisan testimony should have been enough to disqualify him from a position that requires integrity, impartiality, and an even temperament.