Judge’s response to sexual harassment claim shows Louisiana’s not changing practice
More than one in three U.S. women has experienced sexual harassment in the workplace, with these abuses ranging from inappropriate remarks or advances to sexual coercion or even assault.
Since the start of the #MeToo Movement in 2017, studies show improvement in public awareness of this issue and substantial expansion in federal and state legislation to prevent and address its occurrence.
Since 2018, Louisiana has passed a series of sexual harassment protections. State agencies are now required to maintain sexual harassment policies with clear prohibition against retaliation and an effective and timely complaint to action process, to mandate sexual harassment training for all public employees and elected officials, and to tracking and making public the number of sexual harassment complaints and resultant actions.
But a recent court case suggests laws are not changing practice.
A recent first-degree rape trial in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court found a juror openly sexually harassing a member of the district attorney’s office. When informed of the concern by the prosecutors, Judge Ben Willard asked the harassed person to leave the court, as she was a “distraction,” denying her the right to do her job.
The subtext is that her appearance incited the juror’s inappropriate behavior, justifying her removal. Sadly, this approach reinforces victim-blaming of women who experience sexual violations, which is particularly problematic in the context of a rape trial.
Further, this approach denies women their earned opportunities to work and to build their experience and expertise in complex work environments. We know young women are more likely to experience these types of harassment in the workplace, and solutions that separate them from these environments can contribute to unequal opportunities at work as well as the ongoing gender wage gap.
This approach does not align with the sexual harassment training required for state employees.
News reports indicate that when the district attorney contested Willard’s decision, the judge attempted to remove the lead prosecutor, her co-counsel and a case manager. I would be remiss if I did not note that it was women lawyers who brought attention of the sexual harassment of a woman to the attention of the judge, and it was women who were asked to leave the court.
If we cannot expect our courts to effectively identify and manage sexual harassment in their professional contexts, how can we confidently rely on them to effectively adjudicate sexual harassment and assault cases?
The sexual harassment laws are there to protect us, but we need those laws to turn into action. We need our judges and lawyers to understand sexual harassment and assault, to know and act upon the laws designed prevent these violations, and to listen to women — and certainly not to penalize them — when they say these abuses have occurred.
Our state has made important advancements to address workplace sexual harassment, which costs our state both in employee productivity and taxpayer dollars for settlements, in addition to the personal economic and mental health costs experienced by those who are harassed.
Now we need to ensure these laws, including assurance of training and accountability structures, are implemented.
This commentary is the personal opinion of Anita Raj, executive director of the Newcomb Institute, and does not reflect the position of Newcomb Institute or Tulane University.