Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is oblivious to ethical expectations. Consequently, his actions have degraded the once-lofty stature of the Supreme Court. He should resign.
Expensive trips on a private plane and yacht, along with luxurious housing, provided by a billionaire Republican Texan, have gone unreported until disclosure by “ProPublica.” Thomas revealed no such largesse to his peers. His behavior is inexcusable.
No longer are we Americans surprised by excessively inappropriate behavior by formerly trustworthy public servants. Perception matters not to Thomas. He convinced himself he committed no wrongdoing. His generous host, Harlan Crow, claimed that no conversation ever occurred that would have touched upon any upcoming Supreme Court decisions.
Really? Just sports talk? Global warming? New movies? Inflation? Public education?
Thomas reported none of the upscale “personal hospitality” (undefined till recently). After all, he did nothing wrong, nothing extraordinary that normal people would eschew if invited by a super-rich person who simply considered Justice Thomas a friend. It mattered not that Thomas sat on the highest court in the land and rendered decisions that would draw attention from wealthy, conservative plutocrats, including corporate executives and the leader of the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute.
Fortunately for Thomas, the U.S. Supreme Court has no code of ethics. The federal government does prescribe a code of conduct for the lower courts. Even he wanted to be contrite—an unlikely supposition— Thomas could claim that his friendship with a wealthy real estate developer and willing recipient of several six-figure vacations violated no rules or laws.
As noted earlier, perception is not an admissible offense in Justice Thomas’ world. He’s accountable to no one. He enjoys an untouchable status.
Harlan Crow said he expected nothing from his 25-year relationship with Thomas. Of course, his friend’s role as a reliable voice of right-wing legal thought was simply unintentional. It would be presumptuous on my part to suppose that Crow even had a scintilla of interest in overturning Roe v. Wade or election rules in the South, or gun control. Coincidentally, Thomas has served as an inscrutable Supreme Court justice for 31 years.
College football in the highly competitive Southeastern Conference is far more riveting than Supreme Court decision-making. And there’s no keener observer of SEC, I’m sure, than Justice Thomas. Please excuse my sarcasm. An unspoken prohibition on any conversation about the Supreme Court seems absurd, if not improbable.
Friends are wont to decry the ethical void in our country. Our values are shameful, so the plaint is commonly voiced. Political polarization exacerbates our societal decline, the argument goes. Trust is unrealistic.
When I learn about Clarence Thomas’ acceptance of extravagant gifts, I too believe that highly regarded and respected public figures contribute mightily to our national malaise. My faith in those normally considered trustworthy is unrewarded, if not sadly naive
Cynicism is easily and currently applicable. Hope is difficult to sustain. We bemoan the future. We yearn for times when ethics mattered as a desirable standard, not an unattainable objective.
Justice Thomas might acknowledge his poor judgment. I question my own judgment in expecting an apology. Resignation is out of the question. He claims he got poor advice. His moral compass is out of whack.
He sought minimum compliance and forsook any inkling of being a role model. The perks of friendship bestowed by a billionaire and longtime friend took precedence over judicial leadership.
The Supreme Court no longer represents the highest level of probity. Promiscuous use of position is a new standard.
Thomas deserves commendation on his choice of friends…the wealthier the better, the more favors the better, the more luxurious trips, the more appealing.
Where do we find unquestioned ethical behavior? Not on the Supreme Court.
Columnist Howard Freedlander retired in 2011 as Deputy State Treasurer of the State of Maryland. Previously, he was the executive officer of the Maryland National Guard. He also served as community editor for Chesapeake Publishing, lastly at the Queen Anne’s Record-Observer. After 44 years in Easton, Howard and his wife, Liz, moved in November 2020 to Annapolis, where they live with Toby, a King Charles Cavalier Spaniel who has no regal bearing, just a mellow, enticing disposition.
John Fischer says
Much ado about nothing, Howard. Disappointing coming from you.
Peter Gallagher says
Very sad.
Al Sikes says
Knowing Clarence (Mr.Justice) and liking him I am perhaps too forgiving and had he sought my counsel I would have recommended full disclosure regardless of requirements. Given the preponderance of Ivy League justices (exception: Justice Barrett with a Notre Dame degree) I suspect that most have a Rolodex filled with wealthy friends. But I suspect given Justice Thomas’ constitutional views he needs to be especially sensitive to trip wires.
Charles Zvirman says
I confess I don’t know which legislative body has the power to enact such law, but term limits on the SCOTUS is essential. Regardless of political persuasion, the court has crossed the line where personal and or religious beliefs now are the driving factor in major decisions. 58% of the electorate disapprove of of SCOTUS, a historical low. Sad times for the nation.
George Hulseman says
Mr. Freelander is right. Wasn’t it only a few years ago our political actors, not to mention Supreme Court justices, cared about what is called ‘appearance’ of impropriety. Maybe the reason there’s no official code of ethics for the Supreme Court is because it wasn’t previously necessary? But today, for some reason we keep reminding ourselves that we’re supposed to be a nation of laws, and that character and integrity still matter.
Maureen McHugh says
Well said Howard
Memo to Clarence:
“close personal friends” who were not your close personal friends until after you got the title of “Justice” stuck in front of your name … are really not your close personal friends.
If they wouldn’t be caught dead with you BEFORE, you shouldn’t be sucking up to their grift now.
Barbara Denton says
I would imagine if the dealings of other Supreme Court Justices were scrutinized we would find many trips which were gifts from extremely wealthy friends. This is another attempt to lynch Clarence Thomas. Quite frankly he followed the law. The law was changed in March and he will abide by it. He reported the gift of the Frederick Douglass bible and paid the taxes on it. Shame on you for writing this article and reinforcing the “woke” views of the Democrats.
Deirdre LaMotte says
This man who should never have been confirmed, starting with the the pubic-hair-in-the-cola, and his
lack of any opinion for years, better to not embarrass himself; he and his dreadfully deluded wife are
an embarrassment to decorum and the standards of Office. Even my now deceased Republican mother said he has no business being a Supreme Court Justice.
Now he says “court colleagues” advised he was fine accepting lavish gifts for over 20 years. If he doesn’t understand rudimentary Federal Tax Laws, as his “colleagues” obviously don’t, none of them have business
being lawyers, no less a Justice of the Supreme Court. And his dear personal friend , who became his dear personal friend conveniently after his assent to SCOTUS, is a huge collector of Nazi/Hitler memorabilia.
Gosh, what a coincidence.
Barbara Denton says
Let’s have a deep dive into every gift every Supreme Court Justice has received before you put your hateful, prejudiced ravings out there. I think you would find every one of the Supreme Court Justices have received gifts of this nature. For that matter so have the majority of members of Congress. They have been after Clarence Thomas since the last election and they cannot find anything to stick.