SEN. RIEGLE: The serious charges made by Professor Hill are important and a vital part of this consideration. But this nomination need not rest on a determination of that matter.
The basic issue here is plain and simple legal qualification and the suitability of this nominee to hold a lifetime appointment to one of the highest offices in our land. These exalted and rare positions should go to the men and women of all races and ethnic background on one basis and one basis alone, and that is exceptional qualification, towering legal ability and achievement, professional standing within the legal profession of the very highest rank. To settle for less trivializes the court and threatens to turn it into a privileged sanctuary for persons who lack such qualification and who may instead have some narrow ideological agenda of their own to pursue.
Now, Clarence Thomas has a record of a decade of bizarre and questionable legal theories and policy positions that he has spoken numerous times, views he suddenly said at his confirmation hearing that he really didn't mean or that he no longer believes.
His professional record at EEOC was erratic and highly controversial and damaging to the rights of thousands of people who brought forth complaints of workplace discrimination. The appearance is that he stepped on the rights of others to please the higher-ups in the Reagan administration and advance himself.
I believe in affirmative action and that people of color should serve on our federal judicial. But any nominee, regardless of race, sex, or ethnic background, must meet the absolute standard of the highest professional qualification unique to the highest court in our land. At age 43, with very limited courtroom experience, Clarence Thomas does not meet that standard.
The American Bar Association has a process whereby the most distinguished lawyers in America carefully evaluate the formal legal credentials and qualifications of Supreme Court nominees. Since 1955, they've assessed now 23 different Supreme Court nominees in that process. Do you know where Clarence Thomas ranks among those 23 in legal qualification? He ranks dead last. He ranks dead last -- the lowest rating of any Supreme Court nominee in history.
And what a sad commentary, and it says volumes about the purpose of the Bush administration when selecting this nominee. The clear appearance here is that the qualification he had was political, not based on his professional qualification. It appears he was selected, despite his lack of professional qualification because he was a black, ultra-conservative, young enough to apply that extreme philosophy to the court's decisions for the next 40 years. And that's going to affect the rights and liberties of every single person in this country, perhaps as long as the next four decades. It's just as simple and as crass as that. And the nomination should be rejected on those grounds.
I thank the Chair.