News
Christine Blasey Ford aims to own her story with 'One Way Back'
Christine Blasey Ford speaks during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sept. 27, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
Michael Reynolds/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Michael Reynolds/AP
Christine Blasey Ford speaks during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sept. 27, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
Michael Reynolds/AP
Christine Blasey Ford said civic duty compelled her to come forward when she learned Brett Kavanaugh was President Trump’s top choice for a Supreme Court opening in the summer of 2018. But her testimony did not change the ultimate result of Kavanaugh’s nomination.
Ford testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her at a party back when they were teenagers in the Washington, D.C., area. When it was Kavanaugh’s turn to testify, he denied it happened.
In her new book, One Way Back, she writes “My story just can’t be about the three months in 2018 when my life exploded in front of the world’s eyes. My life weaves together surfing, statistics, motherhood, friendships, and politics.”
In an interview on Morning Edition, Ford said it was only a couple of years ago that she felt ready to revisit how her life was upended by Kavanaugh’s rise to the exalted position on the U.S. Supreme Court. Tired of an endless smear campaign, she decided it was time to write her own story.
While she moved far away from Washington, Ford says what she experienced there in her teenage years left an indelible mark. Reluctant to testify in a public setting, Ford forged ahead nonetheless. She writes that part of what gave her the strength to do so was her love of surfing; Ford equates the experience to facing the intensity of ocean waves. “You’ve got to take the wave and you might wipe out. You might get crushed and held under by three waves or you might get a great wave, you know? But you’re going to have to take it,” she told NPR’s Michel Martin.
Ford received tens of thousands of letters from supporters and detractors. She would have to hire a security team, take her family into hiding after threats to kill her, and she would see her character and sanity assailed for years.
But she also became a symbol of courage and hope to untold numbers of people. Following is an interview between NPR’s Michel Martin and Christine Blasey Ford. It has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
To hear the broadcast version of this conversation, use the audio player at the top of this page.
How did you come to share your story with the judiciary committee?
When I saw the short list, I was concerned and felt that I at least needed to share the information, not necessarily publicly, but let the government know that that had happened to me and that possibly they would want to look into some of the other candidates on that list.
Why did you think that was important to do?
I felt like as a citizen that it’s our responsibility to weigh in when we have relevant information for a job of that level of esteem and importance. I grew up in Washington, D.C., so I had high reverence for all of our governmental institutions and the Supreme Court as a child visiting there on field trips, that seemed to be where we send the best of the best. And I just felt a sense of patriotism and civic duty that I needed to let someone know and that they could then decide if it was of import.
This is years after Anita Hill was subpoenaed to testify, after it became known that she had had what she said was an experience of sexual harassment with Clarence Thomas when they both worked together. And that was a very bruising experience, you know, for all involved. Do you remember the whole experience with Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas? Did you think it would be like that or did you think it would be different than that?
I do remember that very well, and I remember most about that is her level of detail in recalling the incidents. I was hoping that it was not going to be similar. I was very scared of the idea of sitting in front of the Senate, and I was hoping that there was some other way that it could play out where I could share the information with the senators without having to sit in Washington, D.C., with them in that big room where she sat.
One of the things that surprised me, people may remember this from the coverage even at the time, is that the committee really did not want to hear from you. Did you find that surprising after all these years after Anita Hill was subpoenaed to testify against Clarence Thomas, and they were heavily criticized for this. At the time, the Judiciary Committee was all male. That was one of the issues sort of at play here .But did you think it would be different all these years later, that they really did want to hear from you?
I did overestimate how interested they would be in this information. I really thought that it was important for them to know and that they would want to know. And I viewed myself as helpful like I was trying to be helpful to them and apparently that was not how they necessarily viewed it and it became highly politicized.
When a decision was made and it was clear that you were then going to testify, can you even sort of describe what it was like to be in the middle of that?
I was still ambivalent about speaking publicly in front of the Senate. I wanted to meet with them privately. And I wrote a letter saying that I felt that was the best thing to do for his family and for my family and would reduce sort of the amount of attention and the circus around it and as well as the threats to both families. So that was my preference but it didn’t happen that way. They wanted to have an open hearing. I wasn’t watching it or thinking about how it connected to a MeToo movement or to another hearing. I was just trying to get through it.
What made you finally decide to cross that threshold? I was struck by your saying up to the last minute you were not sure you were going to go through with it. Why do you think you did?
Well, I certainly had a phone and email inbox full of messages of people telling me not to do it, either for caring reasons or for reasons where they were trying to scare me. And then I also had text messages and emails full of people from all over the world saying, we need you to do this as survivors. And so I had a lot of people, weighing in on what I should do. And it seemed like it was about 50-50 and finally I thought, this is so stressful, maybe this will just end the stress and that maybe if I testify, it’ll be over.
The level of smear media and a report from the Senate or from half of the committee with allegations that are salacious and criminal, that felt really gut wrenching for me because those were the people that I set out to help. So to me, that’s kind of the hardest part is setting out as a citizen and feeling you have a patriotic duty and a higher calling and that you’re willing to sustain some level of backlash. But to have the actual people that you’re trying to help be the people who are involved in that backlash is a little bit difficult to come to terms with. And part of why I wrote the book is I don’t want it to be the case that other people don’t come forward. So I wanted to show that no matter how scary this is, it is something you can live through and survive and come out the other side.
Nina Kravinsky produced the audio for this story. Meghan Sullivan edited the digital version.
News
Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump returned from the spectacle of a Chinese state visit to a less than welcoming U.S. economy — with the military band and garden tour in Beijing giving way to pressure over how to fix America’s escalating inflation rate.
Consumer inflation in the United States increased to 3.8% annually in April, higher than what he inherited as the Iran war and the Republican president’s own tariffs have pushed up prices. Inflation is now outpacing wage gains and effectively making workers poorer. The Cleveland Federal Reserve estimates that annual inflation could reach 4.2% in May as the war has kept oil and gasoline prices high.
Trump’s time with Chinese leader Xi Jinping appears unlikely to help the U.S. economy much, despite Trump’s claims of coming trade deals. The trip occurred as many people are voting in primaries leading into the November general election while having to absorb the rising costs of gasoline, groceries, utility bills, jewelry, women’s clothing, airplane tickets and delivery services. Democrats see the moment as a political opportunity.
“He’s returning to a dumpster fire,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal think tank focused on economic issues. “The president will not have the faith and confidence of the American people — the economy is their top issue and the president is saying, ‘You’re on your own.’”
The president’s trip to Beijing and his recent comments that indicated a tone-deafness to voters’ concerns about rising prices have suggested his focus is not on the American public and have undermined Republicans who had intended to campaign on last year’s tax cuts as helping families.
Trump described the trip as a victory, saying on social media that Xi “congratulated me on so many tremendous successes,” as the U.S. president has praised their relationship.
Trump told reporters that Boeing would be selling 200 aircraft — and maybe even 750 “if they do a good job” — to the Chinese. He said American farmers would be “very happy” because China would be “buying billions of dollars of soybeans.”
“We had an amazing time,” Trump said as he flew home on Air Force One, and told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview that gasoline prices were just some “short-term pain” and would “drop like a rock” once the war ends.
Inflationary pain is not a factor in how Trump handles Iran
Trump departed from the White House for China by saying the negotiations over the Iran war depended on stopping Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said.
That remark prompted blowback because it suggested to some that Trump cared more about challenging Iran than fighting inflation at home. Trump defended his words, telling Fox News: “That’s a perfect statement. I’d make it again.”
The White House has since stressed that Trump is focused on inflation.
Asked later about the president’s words, Vice President JD Vance said there had been a “misrepresentation” of the remarks. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the “administration remains laser-focused on delivering growth and affordability on the homefront” while indicating actions would be taken on grocery prices.
But as Trump appeared alongside Xi, new reports back home showed inflation rising for businesses and interest rates climbing on U.S. government debt.
His comments that Boeing would sell 200 jets to China caused the company’s stock price to fall because investors had expected a larger number. There was little concrete information offered about any trade agreements reached during the summit, including Chinese purchases of U.S. exports such as liquefied natural gas and beef.
“Foreign policy wins can matter politically, but only if voters feel stability and affordability in their daily lives,” said Brittany Martinez, a former Republican congressional aide who is the executive director of Principles First, a center-right advocacy group focused on democracy issues.
“Midterms are almost always a referendum on cost of living and public frustration, and Republicans are not immune from the same inflation and affordability pressures that hurt Democrats in recent cycles,” she added.
Democrats see Trump as vulnerable
Democratic lawmakers are seizing on Trump’s comments before his trip as proof of his indifference to lowering costs. There is potential staying power of his remarks as Americans head into Memorial Day weekend facing rising prices for the hamburgers and hot dogs to be grilled.
“What Americans do not see is any sympathy, any support, or any plan from Trump and congressional Republicans to lower costs – in fact, they see the opposite,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday.
Vance faulted the Biden administration for the inflation problem even though the inflation rate is now higher than it was when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 with a specific mandate to fix it.
“The inflation number last month was not great,” Vance said Wednesday, but he then stressed, “We’re not seeing anything like what we saw under the Biden administration.”
Inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 under Biden, a Democrat. By the time Trump took the oath of office, it was a far more modest 3%.
Trump’s inflation challenge could get harder
The data tells a different story as higher inflation is spreading into the cost of servicing the national debt.
Over the past week, the interest rate charged on 10-year U.S. government debt jumped from 4.36% to 4.6%, an increase that implies higher costs for auto loans and mortgages.
“My fear is that the layers of supply shocks that are affecting the U.S. economy will only further feed into inflationary pressures,” said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon.
Daco noted that last year’s tariff increases were now translating into higher clothing prices. With the Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s ability to impose tariffs by declaring an economic emergency, his administration is preparing a new set of import taxes for this summer.
Daco stressed that there have been a series of supply shocks. First, tariffs cut into the supply of imports. In addition, Trump’s immigration crackdown cut into the supply of foreign-born workers. Now, the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has cut off the vital waterway used to ship 20% of global oil supplies.
“We’re seeing an erosion of growth,” Daco said.
News
Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.
Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.
She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.
Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.
But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”
“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”
As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.
She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.
The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.
News
Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps
The U.S. Supreme Court
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.
The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.
Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”
Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.
Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.
The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.
And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.
-
Ohio5 minutes agoOhio Highway Patrol investigating fatal head-on crash on U.S. Route 62
-
Oklahoma11 minutes agoOklahoma ‘Getting Gritty’ After SEC Tournament Loss
-
Oregon17 minutes agoRecall issued for organic ice cream sold in Oregon over metal concerns
-
Pennsylvania23 minutes agoSen. McCormick tours NSF-funded AI-powered biotech labs at Penn
-
Rhode Island29 minutes agoWhat to expect at Roger Wheeler and Misquamicut beaches this summer
-
South-Carolina35 minutes agoSouth Carolina lands commitment from big transfer portal offensive lineman
-
South Dakota41 minutes agoFact brief: Was an east-west split of Dakota Territory considered?
-
Tennessee47 minutes agoTennessee man arrested after kidnapping his two grandchildren