It Just Gets Worse And Worse

Thomas didn't respond to our detailed Qs about the latest payments.

Crow did. His office told us...

“Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth." pic.twitter.com/cbIdwyvYmU

— Eric Umansky (@ericuman) May 4, 2023

$6200. A month. One wonders about the tux implications, alone. One remembers they got Capone on taxes.

IMPORTANT: Long-time Thomas associate has just put out a statement acknowledging Crow paid

It argues $ didn't have to be disclosed bc, statement says, kid was not a “dependent child”

FACT: Boy lived with & was raised by Thomases from age six on... https://t.co/Q2iAUvHJSS pic.twitter.com/iJuS1lUzkQ

— Eric Umansky (@ericuman) May 4, 2023

Again: did Thomas claim the boy as a dependent on his taxes? Inquiring minds want to know.

And what’s the particular authority of “long-time Thomas associate”?

And reporting one, but not the other? Again, what do his tax filings show?

Am I the only one who thinks we should be hearing from Thomas directly? Or his lawyers or accountants? Or would we just get more sanctimonious claptrap?

Mike Lee thinks it helps that Clarence is more afraid of basic ethics requirements than the Klan. https://t.co/bAzTXpTpgy

— emptywheel (@emptywheel) May 4, 2023

My money’s on the claptrap. It’s Thomas’s go-to defense. And, as ever, definitions matter. Was the boy a “relative”? Or was Thomas his legal guardian?

Each of these revelations has upped the ante. First it’s covering the tab on lavish joint vacations. At least unseemly but the “dear friend” thing provides a fig leaf. Then it’s sweetheart non arms length …https://t.co/Iqr5oNJaqQ

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) May 4, 2023

3/ child. Put your hand up if you’d like Harlan to cover the tab on your kids high school or college tuition. He really is a kept Justice or I guess a Sugar Justice. It’s genuinely beyond belief. Resignation wld be a no brainer for this for a judge anywhere but on Scotus.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) May 4, 2023

The distinction is an important one. And that last line, about resignation, is exactly the problem. A higher ethical standard for SCOTUS is useless without an enforcement mechanism. “Good behavior” has got to be enforceable at some level below impeachment, like, say, term limits instead of a lifetime appointment only ended by death, resignation, or impeachment.

That system has run its course.