We have noted the reluctance of major Democrats to speak
out against Harvey Weinstein, the serial sexual harasser and alleged rapist. As
John
wrote:
Hillary Clinton, whom Weinstein supported heavily,
remained silent until Tuesday, October 10, when she claimed to be appalled
by the revelations that have come out about Weinstein. About which, of course,
she had no idea until now. Barack Obama maintained his silence even longer and, belatedly, the Obamas finally put out a typically self-righteous
statement denouncing their former friend Weinstein.
Not as far as I’ve been able to discern (though I’d be
happy to stand corrected).
While turning a blind eye to blatant and nauseating sex
discrimination in the highest reaches of a major U.S. industry, these groups
have vociferously denounced a number of President Trump’s nominees.
Examples
include Amy Barrett (nominated to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals), Eric
Dreiband (nominated to head the Civil Rights Division of the Justice
Department), and Janet Dhillon and Daniel Gade (nominated to serve as EEOC
commissioners).
It is normal for these groups to take a major interest in
nominees to the positions in question. But it is irresponsible of them to make
unfounded accusations against such nominees.
Consider the case of Eric Dreiband (full disclosure, a
friend). Various “civil rights” groups, including those cited above, have attacked
Eric
for alleged opposition to women’s rights, in particular equal pay for women.
These claims are baseless. During his tenure as General
Counsel of the EEOC (during the fiscal years ending 2003, 2004, and 2005), Eric
personally hammered out settlements that resulted in large monetary awards for
women. For example, EEOC
v. Morgan Stanley produced a settlement of $54 million and
significant injunctive relief for women. Other examples can be found here, here, here,
and elsewhere in EEOC press releases.
In addition, cases Eric filed during his tenure resulted
in large awards after he left the Commission. EEOC v. Sidley & Austin,
for example, an age discrimination case against a major law firm, settled
for $27.5 million. (Barack Obama’s former law firm helped
mediate the case)
EEOC statistics show that during Eric’s tenure the Commission
brought more cases, including ones alleging violation of the Equal Pay Act,
than is its historical norm — both before and since.
Under Eric, the EEOC also participated as amicus in
support of women alleging sex discrimination, including cases before the
Supreme Court (in these cases the Solicitor General filed the brief). Pennsylvania
State Police v. Suders is an example.
Opposition to Eric’s nomination is based in part on
positions he took on behalf of clients after he left the EEOC. (I addressed
other criticisms of Eric in this
post).
Obviously, though, Eric’s work as the top civil rights lawyer for the EEOC is
far more indicative of how he will act as the top civil rights lawyer at the
Justice Department.
Eric does not, of course, embrace every legal position
pushed by liberal civil rights groups. But he has demonstrated the willingness
and ability to enforce aggressively the laws that protect women from unequal
treatment, including sexual harassment.
It would be nice if the civil rights groups that hammer
Eric and other well-qualified Trump nominees would denounce Harvey Weinstein
for his systematic harassment of women.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/10/harvey-weinstein-and-the-silence-of-the-civil-rights-group.php
