March 3, 2022 • 33 mins
Sukari Hardnett was one of the witnesses who was never called to testify at Clarence Thomas’ confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991. She submitted a sworn affidavit to the Committee, describing the sexual harassment she witnessed while working with Thomas at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. But Hardnett was never contacted by the Committee or its Chair, then-Senator Joe Biden. Hardnett and Hill speak for the first time about Hardnett’s experience of being excluded from this historic hearing and how that impacted her life and the country.
If you’d like to keep up with the most recent news from this and other Pushkin podcasts be sure to subscribe to our email list.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Pushkin Getting Even is produced by Pushkin Industries. Join Pushkin
Plus and you'll hear all of our shows ads free
and get access to exclusive bonus content. Subscribe now in
Apple Podcasts or at Pushkin Dot fhim as a young
(00:46):
woman in high school, I was on a bus one
day and a group of guys from a high school
called Resurrection, it was a Catholic high school, well on
the bus and they started singing glory, glory, segregation. They're
putting all the in word where the white men ought
to be. And there was another little girl sitting on
(01:09):
the bus, and that little girl was getting off the
bus in the back of the bus. And this little
girl must have been seven or eight years old. As
she got off the bus, a group of white boys
took a big book, like a big biology or chemistry
book and slammed the book into the little girl's face
(01:30):
and you could see blood. And she was upset and
she was afraid, and you know, she ran off the
bus and I, you know, I panicked. I didn't know
what to do, and I thought I'm next, and I
couldn't help the little girl. I was really almost paralyzed.
But I always felt guilty that I didn't do something
(01:54):
to help that little girl, although realistically there was really
nothing that I could do, but I always felt in
life whenever opportunities like that came up that I would
do the most that I could possibly do. That's Sakarie
Hardnet talking about growing up in New Orleans. To day,
(02:15):
she's a civil rights lawyer outside of Washington, d C.
I wanted to start with that story because it is
at the center of what Hardnet does now. She defends
and protects people. She is courageous. Since that day on
the bus, she has made it her mission to speak
(02:35):
out when she sees injustice, and one of the people
she stepped up to defend was me. I'm Anita Hill.
This is getting even my podcast about equality and what
it takes to get there. On this show, I'm talking
with trailblazers, people who are working on improving our imperfect
(02:59):
world and finding solutions. In my first episode, I spoke
with journalists and commentator Mark Lamont Hill about my on
President Biden's historic announcement of a black female Supreme Court nominee.
In this episode, you're going to hear about another historic
(03:21):
Supreme Court nomination hearing, one that took place over thirty
years ago, one in which the public heard my testimony
and saw the aftermath. This changed the course of my
life forever. But in this episode, you're not going to
hear about me. You're going to hear about Sakari Hardnett.
(03:51):
In the mid nineteen eighties, Hartnett served as the assistant
to the chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a
federal agency in charge of receiving and responding to complaints
of job discrimination. Hardnet and I never crossed path, but
we had a boss in common, Clarence Thomas. In nineteen
(04:14):
ninety one, Hardnett submitted a sworn affidavit to the Senate
Judiciary Committee outlining Thomas's behavior that she had witnessed at
the EOC. I had held the same position prior to her.
She recounted an environment where young black women were being
(04:34):
inspected and auditioned as sexual objects by Thomas. She added, quote,
women know when there are sexual dimensions to the attention
they are receiving, and there was never any doubt about
that dimension in Clarence Thomas's office. Hardnett was one of
(04:56):
three witnesses the committee never called to testify, so I
decided it was time to give her a call. Okay,
it is recording, Zakari, Can you hear me? Yes? I can. Great.
(05:18):
I am so glad to be having this conversation with you.
I have always wanted not only for myself to hear
what you had to say, but I want the world
to hear your voice. And I am ever grateful that
you came forward. And I feel really fortunate to be
(05:41):
able to provide this platform for you to speak today,
even though it is thirty years late. Thank you very much.
This episode is about the importance of the truth and
the price people pay to talent. Hardnet's commitment to truth
telling began well before she went to work at the EOC.
(06:05):
My interests in civil rights came from just growing up
in New Orleans. I grew up in a very volatile
period in New Orleans and being a black woman, and
you know, my whole community was black, and I just
wanted to see some equity there. So early on, I
teamed up with my friends and we would just stage,
(06:27):
you know, demonstrations. We'd go to theaters and try to integrate.
We go to lunch counters and we try to integrate.
We'd ride the buses and sit in the front of
the bus to try to integrate. And that really was
my lifelong experience. So working at the EOC must have
(06:47):
been like reaching a high point in your career since
you were interested in civil rights law. Well, actually it
was very disappointing. When I got to the Commission. I
worked in the office of reviewing Appeals, and we were
basically locked in our offices during the day, and we
(07:09):
were basically not given any training or any support on
how to prepare or to do the appeals, and we
were discouraged from deciding an appeal in favor of some
of the people who filed appeals. So I just felt
that it was dishonest. So I went to the Chairman's
(07:31):
office to say thank you for hiring me, but I
just can't do this job anymore. And at that time
he says, oh, you don't have to leave, Why don't
you come and work in my office. So I was poor.
I didn't have any money, I didn't have any other
prospects and sights. So I decided to take him up
(07:53):
on that offer, and I went to Clarence's office. Little
did I know I was jumping from the skillet directly
into the fire oh, describe the environment in that office.
He was like a fox in a henhouse. He would
(08:13):
approach different females at the Commission. He would talk about
their bodies, he would talk about people that he was dating.
He talked about things that I really wasn't particularly interested
in discussing with him. And he felt that this is
my personal feeling. He felt that all the black women
at the Commission were really there at his beck and
(08:35):
call to say whatever he wanted to say to them,
to attempt to do whatever he wanted to do, and
that we would just we and they were just there
to accept it and not to not to complain about it.
And I must admit I never saw him interact that
way with any of the white females at the Commission.
(08:57):
After a while, I saw, you know, how he interacted
with me. And on many occasions, I would leave the
office in the morning and try to not return, just
to to stay away because I did not want to
be in that office. And he would call around, you know,
have people call around to find out where I was,
for me to go to have coffee with him or
(09:19):
to just chat with him. So I would try to
get involved in other activities at the Commission, and it
got to the point where I just I did not
want to be in that office anymore, and I asked
to be transferred out of that office to the General
Council's office at that time, and I was told by
(09:41):
the woman who was executive secretary at that time that
people did not ask to be transferred out of the
Chairman's office, but I told him that, I guess you know,
I'm an exception and I don't want to be in
here anymore. Did you experience something similar to this in
other professional roles that you had, or was this there's
something unique about this office? Well. Being a black woman
(10:04):
in America and a young woman in America, I mean,
we're often times subjected to what's known now as sexual harassment,
but it happens on different levels, and sometimes, you know,
in order to survive, you just to try to shirk
it off. But in this particular situation, because of the
(10:25):
way that I felt about civil rights, because I knew
the importance of that position and the importance of that organization,
it was really difficult for me to watch Clarence take
it so cavalierly and the things that I thought were
important in terms of civil rights and what was happening
(10:48):
in the nation and our progression as a people, our
progression as women. I just did not see that happening
at the Commission at that time. Do you remember when
you first found out that Thomas was being considered for
the Supreme Court? Yeah? I do. When Clarence was nominated
(11:12):
for that position, I was literally shocked because I knew him,
I knew what he did at the Commission, and I
could not believe that somebody like Clarence would be considered
for such an important position. And really, I don't understand
why I was so naive at that time, because that
(11:34):
same body as the body that you know of help
Plessy versus Ferguson, the same body that said that, you know,
we were not entitled to certain rights as human beings,
as full human beings. So I remember talking to different
people and eventually talking to the dean of my law school,
(11:55):
Edgar Khan, and meeting with Edgar, and you know, saying
to him, Edgar, something's got to be done about this,
and really thinking what could be done, because it liked
it was already etched in stone that that's what was
going to take place. He would be nominated right the
president said he was the best qualified man for the job.
(12:19):
You had already left the EOC by then, that's correct.
He had left the EOC to sit on the Court
of Appeals in Washington, DC, which is considered to be
one of the entry points to a Supreme Court nomination
sitting in a DC Court of Appeals. So, given all
(12:41):
of that that you knew, what did you expect to happen?
How did you expect that the confirmation hearing was going
to play out? Well, you know, I had no idea.
I had no idea. Eventually I began to hear your name,
you know, I began to hear more about you and
what was taking place, and I sort of witnessed what
(13:05):
you were going through with the confirmation hearings, and as
a result of that, you know, I really became alarmed
and got in touch with again with my professor Edgar Khan,
and told him that I felt that I had to
do something, or that we needed to organize a group
of people to get together to do something to support you.
(13:26):
But what we decided to do was to attempt to
give some credence to what you were saying and to
let people know that it was not unusual for Clarence
to act that way with people, and especially black women
at the Commission. Like I said before, he was like
(13:46):
a fox in a henhouse, And I wanted to make
the committee aware of the fact that you were not
lying to them or making up statements, that this, in
fact is what was happening at the EOC and that
you had witnessed it, and that yeah, that I've witnessed
it firsthand. When we come back, Hardnett and I will
(14:11):
get into the details of how her statement was handled
or mishandled. You're listening to getting even my podcast about
equality and what it takes to get there. I'm Anita
(14:32):
Help and I'm talking with Sukari Hardnett. She submitted a
statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee in nineteen ninety one
outlining Clarence Thomas's behavior that she witnessed while working at
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but she was never given
(14:54):
an opportunity to testify. So it's out of your hands.
Now you've written your statement. What did you expect to
happen with the statement? What would you have liked to
have happened even well, would I would like to have
had the opportunity to testify before the committee to let
(15:18):
them know that what he was saying was absolutely true,
that your experiences had been my experiences. At the commission,
Clarence was not the best qualified person for that position.
There were many many I mean, if they wanted to
have a black person in that position, there were many, many,
(15:41):
many black men and women who were far more qualified
than Clarence and somebody who was suitable to step into
the quote unquote seat that was held by Thurgood Marshall.
I was fearful actually that if he got into into
(16:03):
that position, considering conversations that I've had with him, that
he would do exactly what he has done through the years.
Do you know what actually happened to the statement after
you handed it over, Well, I knew that it reached
the Senate Judiciary Committee because they said that, you know,
another woman has come out. So I knew that the
(16:26):
committee had the statement, and I knew that there was
a possibility that they would call me, and I was prepared.
I felt that I was prepared at that time to
answer whatever questions they might have had. Probably not as
artfully and skillfully and with such poise as you did,
(16:48):
but definitely. I felt that I could give them whatever
information they wanted to support your position. So what if
any communications did you have with the Senate Judiciary Committee,
None with the staffers or none? Though you were not
told anything about your statement per se until you were
(17:14):
told that you were not going to be testifying. No,
I was never told that I would not be testifying. Oh. No,
one from the committee, not the staff members on the committee,
ever got in touch with me. I mean, the most
I heard was what I saw on television, And after
(17:35):
a while I stopped looking at the proceedings because I
thought it was just a sham. And as a black woman,
it was very difficult for me to sit down and
see what they were trying to do to you. But
I think because of your poise, and I think I
saw your family there, because of your family support and
(17:58):
just an inner calmness that you seem to have, I
think carried you through and prevented them from succeeding. Were
you still watching the hearings when Biden bang down the
gavel and closed them out. No. At that point I
(18:21):
knew what the writing on the wall was. I mean,
I knew that they were going to confirm Thomas and
you know that was my fear, and they did. And
look where we are now, look at the composition of
the court. Like I said, I was very naive then,
and I thought that, you know, only certain learned people
who had a sense of justice and righteousness should hold
(18:45):
those positions. But I have subsequently learned that that is
not the case. And the sad thing about that is
that I'm not the only one who has noticed that
that these are the things that erode at our democratic system.
You know, our system is based upon us agreeing to
(19:05):
believe in certain things and to live by certain rules.
And when those rules are broken down, when people are
put in a position where they don't trust that the
system will work the way that they've been told it's
going to work or it should work, then that's when
you start to have problems. And I think the thing
(19:28):
that has made America the country that it is is
not so much because it was so righteous from the beginning,
but because we have struggled as a nation to get
to the point where we try to become a more
perfect union. So ultimately, your statement was put into the record,
(19:49):
which is of course not the same as being asked
to testify, not being allowed to testify. I guess let
me ask it. Let me just ask it. Why do
you think the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't either subpoena you
or call you to testify. You know, I have no idea.
I think pretty much it was decided that Clarence would
(20:13):
be placed in that position. I don't know if the
Democratic white males on the committee felt that their hands
were sort of tied and they were attacking a black man.
Clarence used all of the language. I mean, I could
not believe a high tech lynching, I thought to myself,
or a high tech tom But at any rate, it's
(20:35):
almost like they were afraid or intimidated and just sort
of sugarcoated everything when it came to Clarence Thomas, and
it was very difficult for me to look at it
then and then almost thirty years later, I couldn't watch
the Kavanaugh hearings because it was reliving to me. The
(20:58):
whole situation with the Thomas hearing and Miss Ford's testimony
was as compelling as your testimony was. You know, I
have been welcoming the chance to talk with you and
to hear from you, and for the people who would
have wanted to hear from you thirty years ago. Can
hear what you had to say. I think one of
(21:21):
the greatest disservices of the nineteen ninety one hearing was
the failure to call you to testify. I think it
was done as a way to slight and dismiss the
(21:43):
value of the voices of black women. It was a
way to avoid hearing the truth that the committee may
or may not have been willing to deal with as
the truth. I think it was disrespectful, and I just
(22:06):
wanted to be a part of revealing that our truths
have merit and they should be listened to and taken
into account in the way the world is shaped. When
we talk about fairness and equality, we can't have it
(22:28):
unless we are listening to the people who have suffered
from inequality. And so in part, we're asking what if?
And a big part of the what if is what
if all of the information that was available in nineteen
(22:50):
ninety one, that information that you provided, that the other
witnesses have provided, that some of the experts had developed
and were ready to testify to what if that had
been made public? Do you think that the public conversation
(23:12):
might be different today because you've talked about where we
are today, and you talked about Christine Bozzie Ford in
twenty eighteen. Could that hearing have been different had the
nineteen ninety one hearing been different? You know, Anita, I
(23:35):
don't know. But what I do know is that you
give people information and you let them decide. You don't
withhold information and then say, well, look at the conclusion
that they came to. And we as a nation were
(23:56):
denied that opportunity to hear all the facts, to weigh
the facts, and to come to the conclusion, whatever conclusion
we chose to come to now and the Kavanaugh hearings,
they were given the facts, and I think we have
a responsibility to give people the facts, to give them
(24:19):
the truth, and not make believe facts the things that
we make up, but to give them the truth and
then they can decide. And if they take the facts
and they misuse them, then it's on them. If they
take the facts and they cover them up and they
hide it, then it's on them. But we have a
(24:39):
responsibility to give people the facts and to give them
true facts and let them decide at that point what
to do with those facts. In retrospect. Given the way
the things played out with your statement, would you do
it differently today? Without question, I would do the same thing.
(25:05):
I have no reservations, no doubts, not one. I would
do the same thing because what you said and what
you did was the truth, and I wanted to support
the truth. And I think even more so in this
(25:28):
period in our country, we understand how important it is
to have the facts and to have true facts, and
so I would do it. I would do the exact
same thing all over again. Do you think that there
are other people who were intimidated I'm coming forward by
the behavior of the committee. Well, I think afterwards I
(25:51):
talked to people. I remember one friend said to me
that another friend had called and said about me. What
was she thinking? Why would she do something like that?
It never occurred to me that the consequences would be
what they have. Then. I have not been able to
basically get a job with an organization, with a law firm.
(26:14):
I went into private practice because that was the only
option that I had. I've been, you know, pretty much blacklisted.
Not that there was a concerted effort to blacklist me,
but if anybody knew that I'd testified or given support
to you, they basically did not want to have my
(26:35):
name on their letterhead. Has the experience that you had
in nineteen ninety one shaped how you think about fighting
for justice and truth for the people that you represent. Definitely.
You know, there's a saying that was used on the
continent for many, many years, and I believe in that
(26:57):
the struggle continues, and it's just made me even more
determined to struggle and to support just causes that I
believe in that will be my fight for the rest
of my life. It has not curtailed my determination, it
has not hindered it in any way. It's really just
(27:19):
made me even more determined to continue to do what
I do, to fight for what I believe in and
what I know is the right thing to do. The
way the senators and the media handled the hearing didn't
just impact hardnet in me, and it wasn't just that
(27:40):
they failed to call her to testify. All of it
had a ripple effect on millions of people who were
watching at home, some of them deciding for themselves if
they would speak up about sexual harassment that they had
experienced or witness I've received thousands of letters. I still
(28:04):
received letters from people telling me about sexual harassment that
has altered their life, and I can't help wondering why
they still have to pay such a high price for
telling the truth, for doing the right thing. So the
struggle does continue, Yes it does. I do have one question,
(28:25):
in particular, why did you name your program Getting Even Well?
Because I think what we have talked about for many
years is opportunity, and what we're looking for is outcomes.
We want results. I wanted us to think about equality
(28:46):
and equity in a new way, not just in terms
of opportunity, but also in terms of outcomes, measurable outcomes
in the way that people live every day. So that's
why it's Getting Even I think that's my only question.
I just I just want to say that I hope
(29:09):
you continue on the path that you have chosen, and
if at any point I can be of any assistance,
please let me know. But I'm very proud of you,
and you've made a tremendous sacrifice, tremendous sacrifice, and I'm
(29:30):
glad that you did. And if you're ever in Washington,
we should have lunch. Yes, we'll find a place close
to the Supreme Court. Okay, sit down and have lunch together. Okay,
take care. Thank you. I will always be grateful to
(30:00):
Sakari Hartnet for taking an enormous risk to help me.
We will never know the price she paid for simply
coming forward to tell the truth. If only one of
the senators had stepped up and demanded that she be
called to testify, that she be heard, if they had
(30:21):
someone deciding whether to speak out against sexual harassment, they'd witness,
might have had the courage to follow her example. We
can't redo nineteen ninety one, but I'm hopeful that others
like me will see Hartnett as their model for how
to be brave in the face of injustice. On the
(30:51):
next episode of Getting Even, I'll be talking with Susan
Della Ross. She was the only member of my nineteen
ninety one legal team with experience in sexual harassment law.
We'll be discussing what went on behind the scenes. There
was very clear evidence the media never reported on afterwards.
(31:13):
They shut it down once he was confirmed, so the
general public has never come to learn exactly what the
evidence was that corroborated everything you said. Getting Even is
a production of Pushkin Industries and is written and hosted
by me Anita Hill. It is produced by Molaboard and
(31:34):
Brittany Brown. Our editor is Sarah Kramer, our engineer is
Amanda kay Wang, and our showrunner is Sasha Matthias. Louis
Gara composed original music for the show. Special thanks to
Vicki Merrick for voice coaching and Eve Abrahams for recording
(31:55):
this episode. Our executive producers are Mia Lobell and Lee
tal Mallad. Our director of Development is Justine Lang. At
Pushkin thanks to Heather Fane, Carly Migliori, Jason Gambrel, Julia Barden,
John Schnarz, and Jacob Weisberg. You can find me on
(32:19):
Twitter at Anita Hill and on Facebook at Anita Hill.
You can find Pushkin on all social platforms at pushkin Pods,
and you can sign up for our newsletter at pushkin
dot Fm. If you love this show and others from
Pushkin Industries, consider subscribing to Pushkin Plus. Subscribe to Pushkin
(32:44):
Plus and you can hear Getting Even and other Pushkin
shows add free and receive exclusive bonus episodes. Sign up
on the Getting Even show page in Apple Podcasts or
at pushkin dot fm. To find more Pushkin podcasts. Listen
on the iHeartRadio, app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you like
(33:09):
to listen.
Pushkin Getting Even is produced by Pushkin Industries. Join Pushkin
Plus and you'll hear all of our shows ads free
and get access to exclusive bonus content. Subscribe now in
Apple Podcasts or at Pushkin Dot fhim as a young
(00:46):
woman in high school, I was on a bus one
day and a group of guys from a high school
called Resurrection, it was a Catholic high school, well on
the bus and they started singing glory, glory, segregation. They're
putting all the in word where the white men ought
to be. And there was another little girl sitting on
(01:09):
the bus, and that little girl was getting off the
bus in the back of the bus. And this little
girl must have been seven or eight years old. As
she got off the bus, a group of white boys
took a big book, like a big biology or chemistry
book and slammed the book into the little girl's face
(01:30):
and you could see blood. And she was upset and
she was afraid, and you know, she ran off the
bus and I, you know, I panicked. I didn't know
what to do, and I thought I'm next, and I
couldn't help the little girl. I was really almost paralyzed.
But I always felt guilty that I didn't do something
(01:54):
to help that little girl, although realistically there was really
nothing that I could do, but I always felt in
life whenever opportunities like that came up that I would
do the most that I could possibly do. That's Sakarie
Hardnet talking about growing up in New Orleans. To day,
(02:15):
she's a civil rights lawyer outside of Washington, d C.
I wanted to start with that story because it is
at the center of what Hardnet does now. She defends
and protects people. She is courageous. Since that day on
the bus, she has made it her mission to speak
(02:35):
out when she sees injustice, and one of the people
she stepped up to defend was me. I'm Anita Hill.
This is getting even my podcast about equality and what
it takes to get there. On this show, I'm talking
with trailblazers, people who are working on improving our imperfect
(02:59):
world and finding solutions. In my first episode, I spoke
with journalists and commentator Mark Lamont Hill about my on
President Biden's historic announcement of a black female Supreme Court nominee.
In this episode, you're going to hear about another historic
(03:21):
Supreme Court nomination hearing, one that took place over thirty
years ago, one in which the public heard my testimony
and saw the aftermath. This changed the course of my
life forever. But in this episode, you're not going to
hear about me. You're going to hear about Sakari Hardnett.
(03:51):
In the mid nineteen eighties, Hartnett served as the assistant
to the chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a
federal agency in charge of receiving and responding to complaints
of job discrimination. Hardnet and I never crossed path, but
we had a boss in common, Clarence Thomas. In nineteen
(04:14):
ninety one, Hardnett submitted a sworn affidavit to the Senate
Judiciary Committee outlining Thomas's behavior that she had witnessed at
the EOC. I had held the same position prior to her.
She recounted an environment where young black women were being
(04:34):
inspected and auditioned as sexual objects by Thomas. She added, quote,
women know when there are sexual dimensions to the attention
they are receiving, and there was never any doubt about
that dimension in Clarence Thomas's office. Hardnett was one of
(04:56):
three witnesses the committee never called to testify, so I
decided it was time to give her a call. Okay,
it is recording, Zakari, Can you hear me? Yes? I can. Great.
(05:18):
I am so glad to be having this conversation with you.
I have always wanted not only for myself to hear
what you had to say, but I want the world
to hear your voice. And I am ever grateful that
you came forward. And I feel really fortunate to be
(05:41):
able to provide this platform for you to speak today,
even though it is thirty years late. Thank you very much.
This episode is about the importance of the truth and
the price people pay to talent. Hardnet's commitment to truth
telling began well before she went to work at the EOC.
(06:05):
My interests in civil rights came from just growing up
in New Orleans. I grew up in a very volatile
period in New Orleans and being a black woman, and
you know, my whole community was black, and I just
wanted to see some equity there. So early on, I
teamed up with my friends and we would just stage,
(06:27):
you know, demonstrations. We'd go to theaters and try to integrate.
We go to lunch counters and we try to integrate.
We'd ride the buses and sit in the front of
the bus to try to integrate. And that really was
my lifelong experience. So working at the EOC must have
(06:47):
been like reaching a high point in your career since
you were interested in civil rights law. Well, actually it
was very disappointing. When I got to the Commission. I
worked in the office of reviewing Appeals, and we were
basically locked in our offices during the day, and we
(07:09):
were basically not given any training or any support on
how to prepare or to do the appeals, and we
were discouraged from deciding an appeal in favor of some
of the people who filed appeals. So I just felt
that it was dishonest. So I went to the Chairman's
(07:31):
office to say thank you for hiring me, but I
just can't do this job anymore. And at that time
he says, oh, you don't have to leave, Why don't
you come and work in my office. So I was poor.
I didn't have any money, I didn't have any other
prospects and sights. So I decided to take him up
(07:53):
on that offer, and I went to Clarence's office. Little
did I know I was jumping from the skillet directly
into the fire oh, describe the environment in that office.
He was like a fox in a henhouse. He would
(08:13):
approach different females at the Commission. He would talk about
their bodies, he would talk about people that he was dating.
He talked about things that I really wasn't particularly interested
in discussing with him. And he felt that this is
my personal feeling. He felt that all the black women
at the Commission were really there at his beck and
(08:35):
call to say whatever he wanted to say to them,
to attempt to do whatever he wanted to do, and
that we would just we and they were just there
to accept it and not to not to complain about it.
And I must admit I never saw him interact that
way with any of the white females at the Commission.
(08:57):
After a while, I saw, you know, how he interacted
with me. And on many occasions, I would leave the
office in the morning and try to not return, just
to to stay away because I did not want to
be in that office. And he would call around, you know,
have people call around to find out where I was,
for me to go to have coffee with him or
(09:19):
to just chat with him. So I would try to
get involved in other activities at the Commission, and it
got to the point where I just I did not
want to be in that office anymore, and I asked
to be transferred out of that office to the General
Council's office at that time, and I was told by
(09:41):
the woman who was executive secretary at that time that
people did not ask to be transferred out of the
Chairman's office, but I told him that, I guess you know,
I'm an exception and I don't want to be in
here anymore. Did you experience something similar to this in
other professional roles that you had, or was this there's
something unique about this office? Well. Being a black woman
(10:04):
in America and a young woman in America, I mean,
we're often times subjected to what's known now as sexual harassment,
but it happens on different levels, and sometimes, you know,
in order to survive, you just to try to shirk
it off. But in this particular situation, because of the
(10:25):
way that I felt about civil rights, because I knew
the importance of that position and the importance of that organization,
it was really difficult for me to watch Clarence take
it so cavalierly and the things that I thought were
important in terms of civil rights and what was happening
(10:48):
in the nation and our progression as a people, our
progression as women. I just did not see that happening
at the Commission at that time. Do you remember when
you first found out that Thomas was being considered for
the Supreme Court? Yeah? I do. When Clarence was nominated
(11:12):
for that position, I was literally shocked because I knew him,
I knew what he did at the Commission, and I
could not believe that somebody like Clarence would be considered
for such an important position. And really, I don't understand
why I was so naive at that time, because that
(11:34):
same body as the body that you know of help
Plessy versus Ferguson, the same body that said that, you know,
we were not entitled to certain rights as human beings,
as full human beings. So I remember talking to different
people and eventually talking to the dean of my law school,
(11:55):
Edgar Khan, and meeting with Edgar, and you know, saying
to him, Edgar, something's got to be done about this,
and really thinking what could be done, because it liked
it was already etched in stone that that's what was
going to take place. He would be nominated right the
president said he was the best qualified man for the job.
(12:19):
You had already left the EOC by then, that's correct.
He had left the EOC to sit on the Court
of Appeals in Washington, DC, which is considered to be
one of the entry points to a Supreme Court nomination
sitting in a DC Court of Appeals. So, given all
(12:41):
of that that you knew, what did you expect to happen?
How did you expect that the confirmation hearing was going
to play out? Well, you know, I had no idea.
I had no idea. Eventually I began to hear your name,
you know, I began to hear more about you and
what was taking place, and I sort of witnessed what
(13:05):
you were going through with the confirmation hearings, and as
a result of that, you know, I really became alarmed
and got in touch with again with my professor Edgar Khan,
and told him that I felt that I had to
do something, or that we needed to organize a group
of people to get together to do something to support you.
(13:26):
But what we decided to do was to attempt to
give some credence to what you were saying and to
let people know that it was not unusual for Clarence
to act that way with people, and especially black women
at the Commission. Like I said before, he was like
(13:46):
a fox in a henhouse, And I wanted to make
the committee aware of the fact that you were not
lying to them or making up statements, that this, in
fact is what was happening at the EOC and that
you had witnessed it, and that yeah, that I've witnessed
it firsthand. When we come back, Hardnett and I will
(14:11):
get into the details of how her statement was handled
or mishandled. You're listening to getting even my podcast about
equality and what it takes to get there. I'm Anita
(14:32):
Help and I'm talking with Sukari Hardnett. She submitted a
statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee in nineteen ninety one
outlining Clarence Thomas's behavior that she witnessed while working at
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but she was never given
(14:54):
an opportunity to testify. So it's out of your hands.
Now you've written your statement. What did you expect to
happen with the statement? What would you have liked to
have happened even well, would I would like to have
had the opportunity to testify before the committee to let
(15:18):
them know that what he was saying was absolutely true,
that your experiences had been my experiences. At the commission,
Clarence was not the best qualified person for that position.
There were many many I mean, if they wanted to
have a black person in that position, there were many, many,
(15:41):
many black men and women who were far more qualified
than Clarence and somebody who was suitable to step into
the quote unquote seat that was held by Thurgood Marshall.
I was fearful actually that if he got into into
(16:03):
that position, considering conversations that I've had with him, that
he would do exactly what he has done through the years.
Do you know what actually happened to the statement after
you handed it over, Well, I knew that it reached
the Senate Judiciary Committee because they said that, you know,
another woman has come out. So I knew that the
(16:26):
committee had the statement, and I knew that there was
a possibility that they would call me, and I was prepared.
I felt that I was prepared at that time to
answer whatever questions they might have had. Probably not as
artfully and skillfully and with such poise as you did,
(16:48):
but definitely. I felt that I could give them whatever
information they wanted to support your position. So what if
any communications did you have with the Senate Judiciary Committee,
None with the staffers or none? Though you were not
told anything about your statement per se until you were
(17:14):
told that you were not going to be testifying. No,
I was never told that I would not be testifying. Oh. No,
one from the committee, not the staff members on the committee,
ever got in touch with me. I mean, the most
I heard was what I saw on television, And after
(17:35):
a while I stopped looking at the proceedings because I
thought it was just a sham. And as a black woman,
it was very difficult for me to sit down and
see what they were trying to do to you. But
I think because of your poise, and I think I
saw your family there, because of your family support and
(17:58):
just an inner calmness that you seem to have, I
think carried you through and prevented them from succeeding. Were
you still watching the hearings when Biden bang down the
gavel and closed them out. No. At that point I
(18:21):
knew what the writing on the wall was. I mean,
I knew that they were going to confirm Thomas and
you know that was my fear, and they did. And
look where we are now, look at the composition of
the court. Like I said, I was very naive then,
and I thought that, you know, only certain learned people
who had a sense of justice and righteousness should hold
(18:45):
those positions. But I have subsequently learned that that is
not the case. And the sad thing about that is
that I'm not the only one who has noticed that
that these are the things that erode at our democratic system.
You know, our system is based upon us agreeing to
(19:05):
believe in certain things and to live by certain rules.
And when those rules are broken down, when people are
put in a position where they don't trust that the
system will work the way that they've been told it's
going to work or it should work, then that's when
you start to have problems. And I think the thing
(19:28):
that has made America the country that it is is
not so much because it was so righteous from the beginning,
but because we have struggled as a nation to get
to the point where we try to become a more
perfect union. So ultimately, your statement was put into the record,
(19:49):
which is of course not the same as being asked
to testify, not being allowed to testify. I guess let
me ask it. Let me just ask it. Why do
you think the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't either subpoena you
or call you to testify. You know, I have no idea.
I think pretty much it was decided that Clarence would
(20:13):
be placed in that position. I don't know if the
Democratic white males on the committee felt that their hands
were sort of tied and they were attacking a black man.
Clarence used all of the language. I mean, I could
not believe a high tech lynching, I thought to myself,
or a high tech tom But at any rate, it's
(20:35):
almost like they were afraid or intimidated and just sort
of sugarcoated everything when it came to Clarence Thomas, and
it was very difficult for me to look at it
then and then almost thirty years later, I couldn't watch
the Kavanaugh hearings because it was reliving to me. The
(20:58):
whole situation with the Thomas hearing and Miss Ford's testimony
was as compelling as your testimony was. You know, I
have been welcoming the chance to talk with you and
to hear from you, and for the people who would
have wanted to hear from you thirty years ago. Can
hear what you had to say. I think one of
(21:21):
the greatest disservices of the nineteen ninety one hearing was
the failure to call you to testify. I think it
was done as a way to slight and dismiss the
(21:43):
value of the voices of black women. It was a
way to avoid hearing the truth that the committee may
or may not have been willing to deal with as
the truth. I think it was disrespectful, and I just
(22:06):
wanted to be a part of revealing that our truths
have merit and they should be listened to and taken
into account in the way the world is shaped. When
we talk about fairness and equality, we can't have it
(22:28):
unless we are listening to the people who have suffered
from inequality. And so in part, we're asking what if?
And a big part of the what if is what
if all of the information that was available in nineteen
(22:50):
ninety one, that information that you provided, that the other
witnesses have provided, that some of the experts had developed
and were ready to testify to what if that had
been made public? Do you think that the public conversation
(23:12):
might be different today because you've talked about where we
are today, and you talked about Christine Bozzie Ford in
twenty eighteen. Could that hearing have been different had the
nineteen ninety one hearing been different? You know, Anita, I
(23:35):
don't know. But what I do know is that you
give people information and you let them decide. You don't
withhold information and then say, well, look at the conclusion
that they came to. And we as a nation were
(23:56):
denied that opportunity to hear all the facts, to weigh
the facts, and to come to the conclusion, whatever conclusion
we chose to come to now and the Kavanaugh hearings,
they were given the facts, and I think we have
a responsibility to give people the facts, to give them
(24:19):
the truth, and not make believe facts the things that
we make up, but to give them the truth and
then they can decide. And if they take the facts
and they misuse them, then it's on them. If they
take the facts and they cover them up and they
hide it, then it's on them. But we have a
(24:39):
responsibility to give people the facts and to give them
true facts and let them decide at that point what
to do with those facts. In retrospect. Given the way
the things played out with your statement, would you do
it differently today? Without question, I would do the same thing.
(25:05):
I have no reservations, no doubts, not one. I would
do the same thing because what you said and what
you did was the truth, and I wanted to support
the truth. And I think even more so in this
(25:28):
period in our country, we understand how important it is
to have the facts and to have true facts, and
so I would do it. I would do the exact
same thing all over again. Do you think that there
are other people who were intimidated I'm coming forward by
the behavior of the committee. Well, I think afterwards I
(25:51):
talked to people. I remember one friend said to me
that another friend had called and said about me. What
was she thinking? Why would she do something like that?
It never occurred to me that the consequences would be
what they have. Then. I have not been able to
basically get a job with an organization, with a law firm.
(26:14):
I went into private practice because that was the only
option that I had. I've been, you know, pretty much blacklisted.
Not that there was a concerted effort to blacklist me,
but if anybody knew that I'd testified or given support
to you, they basically did not want to have my
(26:35):
name on their letterhead. Has the experience that you had
in nineteen ninety one shaped how you think about fighting
for justice and truth for the people that you represent. Definitely.
You know, there's a saying that was used on the
continent for many, many years, and I believe in that
(26:57):
the struggle continues, and it's just made me even more
determined to struggle and to support just causes that I
believe in that will be my fight for the rest
of my life. It has not curtailed my determination, it
has not hindered it in any way. It's really just
(27:19):
made me even more determined to continue to do what
I do, to fight for what I believe in and
what I know is the right thing to do. The
way the senators and the media handled the hearing didn't
just impact hardnet in me, and it wasn't just that
(27:40):
they failed to call her to testify. All of it
had a ripple effect on millions of people who were
watching at home, some of them deciding for themselves if
they would speak up about sexual harassment that they had
experienced or witness I've received thousands of letters. I still
(28:04):
received letters from people telling me about sexual harassment that
has altered their life, and I can't help wondering why
they still have to pay such a high price for
telling the truth, for doing the right thing. So the
struggle does continue, Yes it does. I do have one question,
(28:25):
in particular, why did you name your program Getting Even Well?
Because I think what we have talked about for many
years is opportunity, and what we're looking for is outcomes.
We want results. I wanted us to think about equality
(28:46):
and equity in a new way, not just in terms
of opportunity, but also in terms of outcomes, measurable outcomes
in the way that people live every day. So that's
why it's Getting Even I think that's my only question.
I just I just want to say that I hope
(29:09):
you continue on the path that you have chosen, and
if at any point I can be of any assistance,
please let me know. But I'm very proud of you,
and you've made a tremendous sacrifice, tremendous sacrifice, and I'm
(29:30):
glad that you did. And if you're ever in Washington,
we should have lunch. Yes, we'll find a place close
to the Supreme Court. Okay, sit down and have lunch together. Okay,
take care. Thank you. I will always be grateful to
(30:00):
Sakari Hartnet for taking an enormous risk to help me.
We will never know the price she paid for simply
coming forward to tell the truth. If only one of
the senators had stepped up and demanded that she be
called to testify, that she be heard, if they had
(30:21):
someone deciding whether to speak out against sexual harassment, they'd witness,
might have had the courage to follow her example. We
can't redo nineteen ninety one, but I'm hopeful that others
like me will see Hartnett as their model for how
to be brave in the face of injustice. On the
(30:51):
next episode of Getting Even, I'll be talking with Susan
Della Ross. She was the only member of my nineteen
ninety one legal team with experience in sexual harassment law.
We'll be discussing what went on behind the scenes. There
was very clear evidence the media never reported on afterwards.
(31:13):
They shut it down once he was confirmed, so the
general public has never come to learn exactly what the
evidence was that corroborated everything you said. Getting Even is
a production of Pushkin Industries and is written and hosted
by me Anita Hill. It is produced by Molaboard and
(31:34):
Brittany Brown. Our editor is Sarah Kramer, our engineer is
Amanda kay Wang, and our showrunner is Sasha Matthias. Louis
Gara composed original music for the show. Special thanks to
Vicki Merrick for voice coaching and Eve Abrahams for recording
(31:55):
this episode. Our executive producers are Mia Lobell and Lee
tal Mallad. Our director of Development is Justine Lang. At
Pushkin thanks to Heather Fane, Carly Migliori, Jason Gambrel, Julia Barden,
John Schnarz, and Jacob Weisberg. You can find me on
(32:19):
Twitter at Anita Hill and on Facebook at Anita Hill.
You can find Pushkin on all social platforms at pushkin Pods,
and you can sign up for our newsletter at pushkin
dot Fm. If you love this show and others from
Pushkin Industries, consider subscribing to Pushkin Plus. Subscribe to Pushkin
(32:44):
Plus and you can hear Getting Even and other Pushkin
shows add free and receive exclusive bonus episodes. Sign up
on the Getting Even show page in Apple Podcasts or
at pushkin dot fm. To find more Pushkin podcasts. Listen
on the iHeartRadio, app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you like
(33:09):
to listen.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.