Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire

[Clare73]

I'm not so sure about that.


It adds up to millions of dollars over the last decade and it's not just "rides" (although private jets and super yachts are pricey) - it is all the gifts, vacations, etc. Reports are that one single vacation would've cost about $500,000, just one and there have been others every year for the last ten years or so.


Wrong on which facts? I thought it was the ethics that he is criticized of violating, but you tell me, what law was I referring to?

Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From Major GOP Donor

Island-hopping on a superyacht. Private jet rides around the world. The undisclosed gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the Supreme Court. “It’s incomprehensible to me that someone would do this,” says one former judge.

www.propublica.org

And again, are you claiming that Clarence Thomas grew up with Harlan Crow?

If he broke no law, he is not guilty. . .and this is much ado about nothing.

Thomas violated no law, and it is criminal to tell a man he cannot associate with his childhood friend because the friend is wealthy.

 

[Pommer]

If he broke no law, he is not guilty. . .and this is much ado about nothing.

Thomas violated no law, and it is criminal to tell a man he cannot associate with his childhood friend because the friend is wealthy.

The “laws” that govern the judiciary are called “Ethics”.

 

[Clare73]

I'm not so sure about that.

And yet you accuse him. . .and that is my objection.

It adds up to millions of dollars over the last decade and it's not just "rides" (although private jets and super yachts are pricey) - it is all the gifts, vacations, etc. Reports are that one single vacation would've cost about $500,000, just one and there have been others every year for the last ten years or so.

Wrong on which facts? I thought it was the ethics that he is criticized of violating, but you tell me, what law was I referring to?

Ethics? Whose ethics?
Do you know for fact that Thomas lacks integrity?
Is it not possible for a man to be soundly rooted in his Christianity, such that his integrity is not compromised by friendship with anyone.

Your experience seems to be limited.

And again, are you claiming that Clarence Thomas grew up with Harlan Crow?

No, I am not. . .I thought I saw that somewhere, but evidently I didn't.

 

[Clare73]

The “laws” that govern the judiciary are called “Ethics”.

If they don't have enforceable penalties, they are not laws.

 

[Pommer]

If they don't have enforceable penalties, they are not laws.

The “penalties” are one loses the position that one holds.
Possibly indicted for crimes related to one’s ethical lapses.

 

[ruthiesea]

I am curious as to how people who defend Justice Thomas would react if Justice Jackson who was appointed by Biden did the same thing?

 

[Belk]

If they don't have enforceable penalties, they are not laws.

They have enforceable penalties for everyone except the supreme court.

Code of Conduct for United States Judges

www.uscourts.gov

 

[DaisyDay]

his childhood friend

This is the third reply to me that you make this assertion, that Harlan Crow and Clarence Thomas are childhood friends. What makes you think this is true?

No, I am not. . .I thought I saw that somewhere, but evidently I didn't.

Then perhaps you should drop this assertion.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Is it not possible for a man to be soundly rooted in his Christianity, such that his integrity is not compromised by friendship with anyone.

Is it possible? Sure. But that is something that should be demonstrated, not assumed. One easy way of demonstrating it would be to report those gifts and vacations as suggested by ethics guidelines, so that all might see the friendship in full view and judge whether or not it has compromised his integrity.

 

[Belk]

Is it possible? Sure. But that is something that should be demonstrated, not assumed. One easy way of demonstrating it would be to report those gifts and vacations as suggested by ethics guidelines, so that all might see the friendship in full view and judge whether or not it has compromised his integrity.

I disagree. The standard is and should be the appearance of impropriety. Every other judge abides by this rule, I see no reason to except the highest court in the land.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I disagree. The standard is and should be the appearance of impropriety. Every other judge abides by this rule, I see no reason to except the highest court in the land.

That's more or less what I said. One thing that helps alleviate the appearance of impropriety is the prompt and accurate reporting of gifts.

 

[Clare73]

Is it possible? Sure. But that is something that should be demonstrated, not assumed. One easy way of demonstrating it would be to report those gifts and vacations as suggested by ethics guidelines, so that all might see the friendship in full view and judge whether or not it has compromised his integrity.

His friendship is not revealed in full view simply by reporting gifts.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

His friendship is not revealed in full view simply by reporting gifts.

Fair enough, but not really relevant to my point. Allow me some editorial discretion, hm?

I'm curious as to why you insist that Thomas should not disclose this information. "It's not legally required" isn't really the best leg to stand on.

 

[Pommer]

His friendship is not revealed in full view simply by reporting gifts.

From the OP:

For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show.

Emphasis mine.

 

[Clare73]

Fair enough, but not really relevant to my point. Allow me some editorial discretion, hm?

I'm curious as to why you insist that Thomas should not disclose this information. "It's not legally required" isn't really the best leg to stand on.

For the simple purpose of overreaching the law and denying one his Constitutional freedoms.

That is no small infraction of the Constitution.

 

[Tinker Grey]

It's rather astonishing. Every year, as a defense contractor, I take refresher courses on ethics. This includes one on accepting and giving gifts. Lord help me if I accept a tchotchky valued at more than $25 from a vendor and don't even think of buying a gov't official dinner.

The idea that a supreme court justice should not report trips around the world is ludicrous.

 

[Clare73]

It's rather astonishing. Every year, as a defense contractor, I take refresher courses on ethics. This includes one on accepting and giving gifts. Lord help me if I accept a tchotchky valued at more than $25 from a vendor and don't even think of buying a gov't official dinner.

The idea that a supreme court justice should not report trips around the world is ludicrous.

Matters not how ludicrous your opinion regards it, he is within the law, and the law governs, not opinion

 

[Tinker Grey]

Matters not how ludicrous your opinion regards it, he is within the law, and the law governs, not opinion

Yes and no. It would not be against the law for me to buy dinner for a gov't official, probably. It would just cost me my job, that's all.

But there are ethics laws: USOGE | Government Ethics and Accountability

The idea that requiring SC justices to have ethics (when every court in the land except SCOTUS is require to) is somehow unconstitutional is absurd.

 

[Clare73]

Yes and no. It would not be against the law for me to buy dinner for a gov't official, probably. It would just cost me my job, that's all.

Irrelevant to the point of law.

But there are ethics laws: USOGE | Government Ethics and Accountability

The idea that requiring SC justices to have ethics (when every court in the land except SCOTUS is require to) is somehow unconstitutional is absurd.

Agreed.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

For the simple purpose of overreaching the law and denying one his Constitutional freedoms.

Which constitutional freedom is being denied by him having to report gifts?

As far as "overreaching the law" goes, the Legislative Branch having the ability to regulate the Judiciary Branch causes difficulties with the separation of powers. Ethical guidelines for lower courts are not laws either - there are no legal penalties (jail time, fines, etc) assessed for breaches.