ACLU to revisit stand against Thomas appearance
By Walter Wright
Advertiser Staff Writer
The American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii will reconsider a controversial vote against asking U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to speak here, its president said yesterday.
A spokeswoman for the national ACLU said last night she was glad the Hawai'i board would re-evaluate actions of "well-meaning but misguided members who got the wrong idea about what the First Amendment means."
The ACLU board last month voted 12-3 against inviting Thomas to a debate here, after its three African American members sent a letter to the ACLU board saying that inviting Thomas would be honoring "black Uncle Toms who turn their backs on civil rights."
Thomas has been criticized by many civil rights leaders for his votes against affirmative action.
One of the three African Americans, Eric Ferrer, said having Thomas talk about affirmative action was like having Hitler speak on the holocaust, the anti-Christ talk about the Bible, or a serial killer discuss the value of life.
But the vote against Thomas prompted criticism that the ACLU chapter was hypocritically ignoring its mission of preserving and promoting free speech.
Ira Glasser, executive director of the national organization, told Hawai'i President Pam Lichty he hoped the board would reconsider.
The chapter's executive committee met Wednesday night and decided to put the question before the board on July 18, Executive Director Vanessa Chong said yesterday.
"There will be a motion for reconsideration," Lichty said.
Another black member, Honolulu attorney Daphne Barbee, said some of the reaction she received was ugly: "I have received more than 650 hate e-mails", some containing obscenities and threats.
She said yesterday she will listen to arguments again, but she defended the right of the chapter to decide who it would invite and pay expenses fort.
"This isn't defending the rights of someone to march in a parade," Barbee said. "We are paying for the parade. Don't we have the right to decide whom we should invite?"
National ACLU spokeswoman Emily Whitfield, reached in New York, said "how can you have a debate if you invite only someone who agrees with everything you say?
"This isn't about their constitutional rights, but about what the First Amendment means."
Lunsford Phillips, another Honolulu attorney who was among the three board members voting in favor of Thomas' appearance, said the board majority caved in for fear of being seen as racially insensitive.
"It was a 'tyranny of the minority' type of thing," he said.
If Thomas were to come, he would debate ACLU national president Nadine Strosser at the 2003 Davis Levin First Amendment Conference, financed by columnist Robert Rees and run by the ACLU chapter.
Chong said the chapter could have sold 3,000 tickets for the debate with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia last January.
Earlier speakers were Ralph Reed, head of the Christian Coalition, and Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice.
