Opposition to Judge Thomas' nomination centered around Judge Thomas's lack of judicial experience and lack of disclosure and credibility under questioning during the confirmation hearings. Supporteres of Judge Thomas cited his work in the EEOC and his judgeship as adequate experience, and Sen. Hatch said Judge Thomas had been unfairly scorned by civil rights groups because of his differing views.

In his opening statement, Judge Thomas vehemently denied having harassed Ms. Hill during their work at th eDepartment of Education and the EEOC, and described his relationship with Ms. Hill. He went on to characterize the confirmation process as an ordeal in which he and his family were humiliated, and said the price for confirmation was too high. Judge Thomas summed up his statement by stating his refusal to respond to questions on his private life, saying he would "not provide the rope for ...[his] own lynching." Judge Thomas delivered the statement in a forceful and almost belligerent tone, and asked the committee to "let this process end."

As Sen. Hatch began his questioning of Judge Thomas following Judge Thomas' opening statement, Sen. Hatch and committee chairman Biden exchanged sharp words concerning the introduction of Professor Hill's affidavit into testimony. The committee recessed for five minutes, and reemerged to state it would delay questioning Judge Thomas and would hear testimony from Professor Hill.

Professor Hill, speaking in level, measured tones, told the committee of her career, her relationship with Judge Thomas, and the behavior of Judge Thomas toward her in the workplace. She said Judge Thomas often asked her for dates, which she turned down, and often instigated discussions of sexual matters which she refused to take part in. She said Judge Thomas explicitly discussed aspects of pornographic movies he had seen, and emphasized his own sexual prowess.

Professor Hill said she attempted to avoid opportunities for extended conversations with Judge Thomas, but transferred with him to the Equal Employment Oportunity Commission when he was promoted to head the agency because she had no alternative job.

Committee members questioned Professor Hill on the substance of the incidents involving the sexual harassment charges, on her subsequent relationship to Judge Thomas after she left the EEOC, and her reasons and possible motives for stating the charges. Committee members specifically questioned Professor Hill on the graphic and explicit nature of the incidents of sexual harassment she charged against Judge Thomas.

Judge Thomas characterized the hearing as a "travesty," and "a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who...deign to think for themselves." He also said the hearing sent a message to blacks that if they do not "kow-tow" to an old order, they will be lynched. Committee members questioned Judge Thomas on his knowledge of Professor Hill's allegations, on his relationship with Professor Hill after she left the EEOC, and possible motives for Professor Hill's testimony.

Sen. Hatch proposed that Professor Hill created her charges from a civil rights case hear in the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, and from the 1970's book The Exorcist. Judge Thomas repeated his denial of the charges put against him, an dsaid the charges of sexual harassment were particularly painful when put against a black man as they reinforce social stereotypes against blacks

Professor Paul, American University law professor who met professor Hill when she was conducting summer research at American University, testified Professor Hill told him in 1987 of the sexual harassment that took place in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Ms. Wells, friend of Professor Hill told her of sexual harassment in the early 1980;s . She also said she understood how Professor Hill felt during the harassment and in testifying, as she said she had been a victim of sexual harassment herself. Mr. Carr said Prof. Hill told him in the early 1980's about the sexual harassment, and said Prof. Hill showed an "unwanted sexual interest in her." Ms. Hoerchner, fellow classmate at Yale Law School with Professor, also testified Professor Hill told her she was being sexually harassed in the eary 1980's.

Ms. Berry-Meyers testified to Judge Thoams' circumspect managerial style in the EEOC, and said her "impression" was that Professor Hill desired a greater relationship with Judge Thomas than "just a professional one." Ms. Alvarez criticized Professor Hill, calling her the "Rosa Parks of sexual harassment," and said her allegations were a personal move on her part to advance her own interests. Dr. Fitch testified in support of Judge Thomas' character, as did Ms. Holt, who said Professor Hill never told her during their employment at the EEOC together about being sexually harassed. Ms. testified about the telephone logs which showed Professor Hill's calls to Judge Thomas.

Mr. Doggett testified Professor Hill believed, in the early 1980's, that a sexual attratction extisted between them when none existed. He provided testimony about a party in Washington in the mid 1980's in which Professor Hill approached him and implied she felt a sexual attraction toward him, when he felt he had shown no reciprocal attraction. The testimony provided evidence for the denigration of the character of Professor Hill, who was characterized as an unstable person.

Mr. Doggett responded very angrily to the use by Senator Metzenbaum of unsworn FBI records in questioning him. Chairman Biden Other panel members described occasions in which Professor Hill might have been likely to mention previosu sexual harassment to them but did not.

Ms. Talkin testified she worked very closely with Judge Thomas during his tenure at the EEOC, and she never perceived any hint of impropriety, about which women have a "sixth sense." She characterized Judge Thomas as being of the greatest conscientiousness concerning gender issues.

On November first, Judge Thomas took a judicial oath in a more private ceremony at the U.S. Supreme Court building.