Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:42:35.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public Opinion and the Thomas Nomination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Kathleen Frankovic  and
Joyce Gelb
Kathleen Frankovic
Affiliation:
CBS News
Joyce Gelb
Affiliation:
City College of New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Until recently, the nomination of a justice to the U.S. Supreme Court had little public opinion relevance. Questions might be raised about the nominee's qualifications, perhaps including his or her liberalism or conservatism, but the American people tended to acquiesce in Court appointments. That changed during the Reagan administration, when opponents of the president's choice of Robert Bork decided that public opinion did matter and effectively campaigned to turn the public against Bork.

The Thomas nomination, however, raised even more questions about public opinion. Race and the role it should play in Court nominations was as important as Clarence Thomas's legal opinions. And, as soon as Anita Hill's charges of sexual harassment became public, other aspects of public opinion came into prominence.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , September 1992 , pp. 481 - 484
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

CBS/New York Times Polls, 1985–1992.Google Scholar
Gutek, Barbara. 1985. Sex and the Workplace. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, Mary. 1990. “Feminism within American Institutions.” Signs Autumn: 26–54.Google Scholar
Klein Associates, Inc. 1988. The 1988 Working Woman Sexual Harassment Survey Executive Report. Cambridge, MA: Klein Associates.Google Scholar
National Council for Research on Women. 1991. “Sexual Harassment: Research and Resources: A Report in Progress.” New York: National Council for Research on Women.Google Scholar
Newsweek, October 21, 1991.Google Scholar
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. 1981. “Sexual Harassment of Federal Workers: Is It a Problem?” Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. 1987. “Sexual Harassment of Federal Workers: An Update.” Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
1990 Virginia Slims Opinion Poll, Storrs, CT: Roper Organization Inc.Google Scholar