What should a commencement speaker at the University bring to the table? A fresh perspective? An inspiring presence? A load of personal baggage so long that the mere announcement of his presence is enough to send people into a rage? Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has a controversial personal history and holds strong judicial opinions that have brought both approbation and condemnation upon him.

But simply being a divisive figure should not disqualify Justice Thomas, just as it should not disqualify anyone else, from speaking at the final exercise in college for many of us students. Justice Thomas’ presence at spring commencement is a prime opportunity for furthering more of what college ought to be about, debate and discussion, and not a forum for political or personal invective.

As most of us know, Justice Thomas was accused of sexual harassment by Anita Hill during his confirmation hearings to become a Supreme Court Justice in 1991. None of these allegations were proven and a majority of senators, 11 Democrats and 41 Republicans, voted to confirm him.

Neither I nor anyone at this University knows the truth about the sexual harassment allegations; without conviction or confession, the presumption of innocence must remain.

Rather than concocting conspiracy theories about the University administration’s views on sexual harassment, we should use Justice Thomas’ visit to discuss the damage done by sexual harassment accusations and the difficulty in resolving those claims. Since Justice Thomas has been “convicted” only in certain sectors of public opinion, removing him as graduation speaker would be an affront to the American justice system and a victory for ochlocracy.

Others consider Justice Thomas a divisive figure because of his conservative voting record. Would there be the same outrage over a firmly liberal justice such as Stephen Breyer? I hope not. Justice Thomas’ views are his own and may not be politically correct, especially with regards to his race. You can disagree with his judicial philosophy as much as you like, and there are many areas of the law where I differ with Justice Thomas.

But to claim he is not worthy of being our University’s commencement speaker because of his ideological beliefs goes against the entire concept of a university being an open forum for ideas.

For all those who will be listening to Justice Thomas at spring commencement, I encourage you to take the opportunity to hear him out before casting judgment on him. Reflect on what he says, what he represents and how his life story might apply to your own career. Discuss the controversy and stigma that comes from sexual harassment accusations. Discuss his legal views. But do not attempt to silence or disrupt a unique and significant commencement speaker simply because of unproven allegations or personal disagreements.

- Chris Chiego is a junior from Memphis, Tenn. majoring in international affairs and history.