Counsel Wore a Pink Dress
I watched the impeachment hearings obsessively, and furtively because I was at work. (I streamed C-SPAN on an iPad in my office. If my workplace ever blocks streaming media, it’s definitely my fault.) As a lawyer who doesn’t practice in a courtroom, I was riveted by the often skillful questioning by committee counsel, as well as a few members of Congress with backgrounds as prosecutors or trial attorneys, probing the events leading up to President Trump’s fateful call with Ukrainian President Zelensky.
But now, a few weeks later, here’s what I can’t stop thinking about: Ashley Callen’s pink dress. Not since the Clinton impeachment have I thought so much about a dress.
Ms. Callen is Minority Chief Counsel for the Oversight & Investigations subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee. On December 9, 2019, she was tasked with questioning her colleagues from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. (Side note: I still can’t quite get my head around this hearing. Why would the committee lawyers be called to testify? Was this exercise even necessary? Does the Judiciary Committee not get C-SPAN? So many questions.)
I wasn’t sure it was a dress at first. Ms. Callen was shown seated throughout the hearing, and it was only during a recess when C-SPAN captured a full-length shot of her that I realized she was in fact wearing a very feminine, long-sleeved, hot-pink, short dress. In a roomful of grey, black, and navy, she stood out. (My initial, ludicrous thought was that she must have plans for dinner or maybe a party later. No time to change!) Pretty, I thought, but is it professional? Befitting a serious proceeding? And then I caught myself. Does it matter? And is it even okay to question what she’s wearing?
Let me be clear on one point: Women can wear whatever they want. Allow me to repeat: WOMEN CAN WEAR WHATEVER THEY WANT. Legislating what women must or must not wear — say, mandating or banning hijab or enforcing school dress codes that discriminate against girls and people of color — has no place in a free society.
My question is not should she have been allowed to wear that dress? but rather why did she choose to wear that dress? Intended or not, the clothing we wear speaks for us (and can even affect how we behave). It can be as simple as selecting appropriate attire to convey respect for the occasion and place: a court appearance, a house of worship, a black-tie event, a funeral. Dressing to send a message can also be more intentional. The Democratic women of the 116th Congress (joined by Elise Stefanik) wore suffragist white to the State of the Union address in a show of solidarity. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is known to make symbolic sartorial choices — a red coat for a confrontation with President Trump and black for the “solemn” day of the House vote on articles of impeachment. Clothing choices can also be confounding, as evidenced by First Lady Melania Trump.
For their hearing testimony, Stephen Castor and Daniel Goldman, Minority and Majority counsel for the Intelligence Committee respectively, both wore dark suits with white shirts. The color of their ties matched their political sides: Mr. Castor wore a red tie and Mr. Goldman, a blue striped one. I doubt this was a coincidence. Otherwise, their dress was identical: conservative, appropriate, unremarkable. You see the individuals, not what they’re wearing.
Men in suits have the advantage of professional, neutral attire that has no counterpart for women. This disparity has given rise to efforts to dictate appropriate dress for female attorneys, including dubious advice from a major law firm, a state bar association, and more than one law school. The trend towards business casual dress codes has made it even more complicated for women to navigate workplace attire.
Mr. Castor created a stir on social media when he strode into the hearing room with a Fresh Market reusable grocery tote, which he dropped unceremoniously onto a table and began unloading document binders. I laughed, too, but I confess I admired Mr. Castor’s lack of self-consciousness in the spotlight. State Department official George Kent had the same DGAF vibe carrying a large Nalgene water bottle to his appearance before the House Intelligence Committee. I suspect that for both men the decision was utilitarian, though Mr. Kent, impeccably dressed in bowtie and three-piece suit, might have considered how his eco-friendly accessory would look. Mr. Castor probably didn’t give the grocery bag a second thought. He needed to carry a big stack of documents. Perhaps his briefcase was too small or had a broken handle, or maybe he doesn’t even own one. I like to think he left the house before his wife could stop him.
Ms. Callen’s dress, however, was not an afterthought. You don’t wear bright pink for a televised hearing and think nothing of it. The dress practically shouted: Look at me.
As an institution, Congress remains overwhelmingly male, and the number of Republican women is actually shrinking. The House Judiciary Committee includes only two Republican women (compared with nine for the Democrats), although that’s a decent number given there are only 13 Republic women in the entire House of Representatives. Many female legislators at the hearing were dressed in the same drab palette as their male counterparts, but a few wore more adventurous, albeit tastefully muted colors, including Representative Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) in mustard and Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) in teal.
Still, the pink dress was next level. It was not just a confident bright jacket. It was a soft and unabashedly feminine dress. It was, dare I say, subversive. Here I am. I’m not one of the guys. I’m not trying to look like one of the guys. I’m the GOP counsel, and I’m asking the questions.
What would I have worn in Ms. Callen’s place? Definitely a blazer, probably a suit in a dark color, mimicking my male colleagues’ apparel. I would not have wanted to stand out — at least, not for my outfit. I would have played it safe.
Ashley Callen didn’t play it safe. She looked confident, comfortable in her own skin and in a bright pink dress. In the ongoing national nightmare that is President Trump’s impeachment, this may not seem like much. But it’s progress.
