Thursday, April 27, 2023

Clarence Thomas' continued presence on the Supreme Court only underlines its increasing moral and ethical illegitimacy

 

When George H.R. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas for the U.S. Supreme Court, most people who thought about it found it a direct affront to the legacy of the man he would be replacing, civil rights legend Thurgood Marshall.  Thomas was not only in no way qualified for a position on the highest court of the land, but he seemed to have no comprehension that Marshall's work to overcome discrimination was benefiting him even as a "token" black Republican; the party needed him to "prove" it wasn't just a white party, although it helped if you thought like one.

Thomas' contempt for Marshall's legacy became a matter of record as Reagan's appointee to head the EEOC, his “mission” being to end affirmative action and stop “discrimination” against white people. Unlike Marshall, who was appointed to the Second Circuit Court by JFK and then as Solicitor General by LBJ, Thomas' only "credentials" were that he was a black man with hardcore far-right inclinations more typical of white racists. 

Obviously he was naturally “useful” for Republicans, besides being a “token” to “prove” the party wasn’t “racist.” Party leaders envisioned Thomas as a useful tool for their long-range objective of packing the courts with right-wing ideologues, and he  was nominated and approved for the DC District Court of Appeals, which he was also unqualified for as he had no previous experience even in arguing before such courts, or any courts.

Thus it was easy to be cynical about Thomas’ nomination for the Supreme Court. Bush’s previous Supreme Court appointee, David Souter, embarrassed him by turning out to be a moderate who often sided with the left-wing of the court, and there was a need to nominate someone whose right-wing “credentials” were unquestioned, and Thomas’ tenure in the Reagan administration demonstrated that there was a self-loathing for being born “black”—he allegedly once went into a law school classroom wearing a stereotypical “field hand” outfit as a show of self-pity as to how he felt white students viewed him—and like closet gay men who attack other gay men because they remind them of their “shame”—he attacks other blacks because they remind him of the social reality he can’t escape, and he hates them for it.

But Thomas' lack of qualifications for the bench were not at issue during his confirmation process, since senators felt constrained by the "need" to replace Marshall with another black applicant, which Republicans were well aware of. Despite committee votes refusing to endorse Thomas' nomination, opposition from civil rights organizations, “tears” over his anti-abortion beliefs and the testimony of his former assistant, Anita Hill, about somewhat bizarre claims about his behavior, Thomas was confirmed by a 52-48 vote, aided by nine "yeas" by conservative southern Democrats. 

Thomas then proceeded onward to a rather undistinguished career on the bench, rarely giving opinions, and when he did, they were so far out of mainstream opinion that it only confirmed the belief that he had no real judicial philosophy, just personal “issues," gripes and chips-on-his-shoulder that were not tempered with an understanding of rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Unfortunately for Thomas, this failure to distinguish himself on the bench has left him with a legacy that is now only “distinguished” by both his and the right-wing of the bench’s corruption. His wife, Ginni, is a far-right activist who actively supported election fraud conspiracies and even contacted the White House to urge it to act to overturn the 2020 election. Despite this, Thomas' refused to recuse himself despite being fully aware that he couldn't even pretend to be capable of impartial judgment.

The fact the Thomas was the lone dissenting vote on cases involving the election and the January 6 insurrection indicates that his wife at the very least had undue influence on him—and more likely they were working in tandem, which revealed that Thomas had little understanding or care for constitutional government: he was a partisan extremist who had no business making rulings  that effected millions of people.

But there are other partisan extremists on the Supreme Court, whose advancement was bought and paid for by the dark money that far-right corporate and billionaire activists hoped would put the "right" people on the bench who supported their "vision" of constitutional “originalism,” which they interpreted  as protecting only their “rights."  

What makes Thomas stand out is the fact that he has the greatest contempt for the “esteem” of the court and thinks nothing of degrading it to act out his personal whims and vindictiveness.  However, his refusal to recuse himself for election process bias is one thing; another thing is that he is being enabled by a corrupt right-wing of the court that refuses to “police” itself. Thomas may have the longest tenure of any on the court at the present time, but his personal corruption is such that he is due no "respect" or special “dispensation.”

The list of Thomas' corrupt activities seems to be growing by the week: Thomas is accused of taking “gifts” from billionaires like Harlan Crowe; Thomas certainly likes his gifts, which he stopped reporting on his financial disclosures as required for the past 20 years. One of these recent “gifts” was an island-hopping “vacation” for Thomas and his wife that cost an estimated $500,000—so one may suspect that Thomas has a reason for stopping reporting these little gratuities. 

Thomas claims that he sought “guidance” about whether to report his corrupt transactions on his financial forms, and he apparently received support by other judges who were equally corrupted by such “gifts” as long as they were from “close friends”—that is “friendly” so long as there is a quid pro quo “understanding.”

Thomas has been in clear violation  of the 1978 Ethics in Government Act for years, which also includes the disclosure of real estate transactions over $1,000. There are now calls for his resignation over reports that he sold three properties to Crowe in 2014 valued at the time at $133,000. Thomas belatedly tried to “amend” not only his 2014 financial statement, but many others which include previously unreported income from his wife. It is clear that Thomas’ personal corruption is such that there really is no redeeming him. There have been calls not only for his resignation, but a criminal investigation by the Justice Department.

What is equally appalling is the lack of “oversight” that led to corrupt practices on the bench by Chief Justice John Roberts, who apparently receives little respect from those further-right on the court anyways. Roberts refused to voluntarily testify before a Senate committee, and furthermore refused to publicly  comment on Thomas’ ethical shortcomings. The fact that this isn’t the first time Roberts has not commented on this means that he has not acted as well; Thomas has  acted to “reveal” what he has illegally concealed only after damaging revelations in the media.

It is of course unlikely that Thomas will “voluntarily” resign unless even worse allegations of illegality are revealed that even his colleagues on the bench can’t ignore, and his continued presence only reflects worse on the court’s perceived illegitimacy.  But the reality is that the damage has been done; while the court avoided stepping on a land mine by allowing the sale of an abortion pill that a Texas judge had blocked, this seems more like an effort to avoid further scrutiny on its legitimacy.

No comments:

Post a Comment