The Failure of White Allyship in the Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing
Yesterday, at Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s Confirmation Hearing, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) conceded that he would “knowingly [be] violating the rules” of the Senate Judiciary Committee by releasing emails detailing Judge Kavanaugh’s views on racial profiling, indigenous rights, and Roe v. Wade. These emails were part of a mass of 42,000 pages of documents that arrived at the doorsteps of Senate Judiciary members on the eve of the hearing following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request Democrats filed a month ago. These documents were marked “Committee Confidential,” a designation that has, in the past, reflected bipartisan consensus on what constitutes confidential information. Regardless of whether Senator Booker faces repercussions for the disclosure, he was prepared for the repercussions of his actions.
Whiteness and the Silencing of Black Dissent
Recognizing the need for the public to know whether Judge Kavanaugh is really as committed to justice as he claims, Senator Booker, in coalition with Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI), released emails yesterday that provide insight into the workings of Kavanaugh’s legal mind. Senators Booker and Hirono’s acts of defiance came after Senator Kamala Harris’ (D-CA) leadership during this morning’s hearing when she put significant pressure on Kavanaugh to disclose his knowledge of Robert Mueller’s investigation. Senator Harris demanded Kavanaugh answer a question when Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) interrupted her, noting that he would likely raise an objection. The confidence with which Lee intruded into Senator Harris’ time reflects a long tradition that assumes the automatic and immediate silence of women of color at the onset of the white male voice.
Then, in response to Senator Booker’s opposition, Republican Senators noted their “disappointment” that some of their colleagues were — in the words of Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) — “unwilling or unable to conduct themselves in this hearing with regular order in accordance with the rules of the committee and the rules of the Senate.” The fact that Senator Booker raised issues in an open session, according to Senator Cornyn, made Senator Booker’s defiance of protocol particularly egregious. The presumption is that any resistance should be done in private. In other words, Senator Cornyn viewed Senator Booker voicing his concerns in public as particularly audacious. Within the doctrine of respectability politics, Senator Cornyn ripped a page out of a Southern white civility manual and reprimanded Senator Booker for his brazen commentary — the implication being that Senator Booker should simply suffer in silence until he checked in privately with white leadership before voicing his concerns.
Why You Should Care
Why do the events of yesterday matter? And how does ally inaction place a greater burden on those releasing these documents? Lest weary readers think we are just two law students writing this piece as a millenial rant, let us be clear: we have grave concerns about what yesterday’s hearing suggests about the future of civil rights under the law and the future of coalition building. In shielding Kavanaugh from the backlash that could result from a knowledgeable and engaged citizenry, the Senate Judiciary hearings are fundamentally anti-democratic. Some may believe that these documents and emails have little bearing on who Judge Kavanaugh is and who he could be as the next Supreme Court Justice. Republican judiciary committee members allege that many of these documents are personal and therefore not relevant in assessing Kavanaugh’s fitness.
The content of the e-mails makes the silence of white allies in the Senate Judiciary Committee even more tragic. The reality is that these emails provide a dystopic and frightening lens into Judge Kavanaugh’s problematic beliefs, including a 2001 e-mail where he asserts an incorrect interpretation of strict scrutiny doctrine as a way to steal government programs from Native Hawaiians or a 2003 e-mail where he expressed his ahistorical and anti-intellectual stance on abortion that Roe v. Wade is not the settled law of the land.
What this Hearing Means for the Future of Allyship
Following Cornyn’s admonishment, Senator Booker recognized that his civil disobedience would likely result in his political demise. He responded with strong and astounding clarity: “I understand the penalty comes with potential ousting from the Senate. I openly invite and accept the consequences of my team releasing that email right now.”
Senator Booker’s leadership, and the unity of Congresspersons of color supporting him, is a blunt contrast to the anonymous White House critic who aspired to claim membership to the “resistance” while maintaining their position within the executive, or even Senator Ed Markey’s passive Twitter support. Whereas political leaders of color are putting their careers and reputations on the line in the interest of true service, others make weak showings of displeasure without any risk or sacrifice to their position or privilege.
To scholars of race and to people of color, this is a familiar tale of black excellence and the failure of white allyship. This was a perfect opportunity for the white opposition to Kavanaugh’s appointment to acknowledge the flagrant sham of a confirmation process, yet white Congresspersons and self-professed allies such as Senator Feinstein continue to make vague statements about their polite displeasure of his nomination, while Senators Booker, Harris, and Hirono demonstrate bravery and heroism. What is missing in this tale of heroic defiance and civil disobedience is the active and intentional allyship of white Senators also serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Scholars and activists have written extensively on what it means to be an ally. There is no lack of notice or information to White America regarding best practices for allyship. One need only google “how to be a good white ally” to access handbooks and articles about concrete steps to enact allyship. These suggestions — written by people of color and white allies alike — detail both personal and structural interventions in support of people of color.
White allyship is not about performative non-racist demonstration but rather disruptive anti-racist action. The inaction of white Senators, as Senators of color lead the Congressional resistance to Kavanaugh’s confirmation, is reprehensible and an indicator that modern white activism has not rejected the historical practice of relying on the labor of people of color. As two law student activists who daily witness the unequal distribution of action across racial lines, it is disheartening to see how a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate allyship was wasted. Exceptional actions are necessary, and should not be performed solely by people of color.
In the end, people of color will once again pay the political and emotional price for a debt they never incurred.
