Should the Chief Judge of the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals have been overseeing the sexual harrassment investigation of US District Judge Samuel Kent? I'd say no, given her past behavior. Consider her comments during Susan Waltman's suit against International Paper.
A district court dismissed the case and Waltman appealed. At the hearing before a three-judge panel, Waltman's attorney said she "was subjected to virtually every type of sexual harassment imaginable." Jones responded: "Except rape or any serious proposition or any action in which she felt endangered or threatened." When Waltman's attorney mentioned that "one of the guys pinched her breast," Jones said, "Well, he apologized." According to a 1991 account in the Houston Chronicle, witnesses said "gasps could be heard from the courtroom gallery."
Though maybe she'd take this seriously since the people are, like her, white-collar types. Apparently she thinks harrassment laws might apply to them, unlike their blue-collar brethern.
During the hearing Jones noted that "we're not dealing with lawyers here, we are not dealing with the white-collar worker ... We are dealing with people whose standards are different." This class distinction, suggesting that female lawyers have more protection under the law than female factory workers, shows up again in her written opinion: "Similar graffiti probably appear on workplace walls everywhere."Posted by armand at November 28, 2007 09:08 AM | TrackBack | Posted to Law and the Courts