Clarence Thomas Forgets Gifts, Disclaims Child, Is Disgraceful

Another 'nother one!

If your defense to allegations that you broke ethics laws is "my son isn't really my son," you're a garbage person. That's it, that's the tweet.

We're speaking of course about Justice Clarence Thomas, the ethics fireball currently engulfing the Supreme Court. Today ProPublica is out with yet another story on Thomas's habit of relying on the kindness of strangers, particularly strangers with a shit ton of money. Once again, Thomas is revealed to have accepted tens of thousands of dollars in benefits from rightwing billionaire Harlan Crow and forgotten to mention it on his mandatory financial disclosures. That would be on top of the half million dollars in vacations every year with Crow, plus the purchase of Thomas's mother's house and allowing her to live there rent-free for life. Whoopsie!

But first, ProPublica gives some background on Thomas's nuclear family, which included his wife Ginni, of course, as well as Thomas's great-nephew Mark Martin:

[In 1996], the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas’ nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin’s situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in “under very similar circumstances.”

Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn’t have children of their own. They pitched Martin’s parents on taking the boy in.

“Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything — his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities,” journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.
Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Okay ...

Families are made lots of different ways, and Your Wonkette is not going to comment on how the Thomases built theirs. We will note however, that it's pretty despicable to say that a child you took into your home and raised as your own for 13 years is not your son , and thus you didn't have to report that your buddy Harlan was paying his private school tuition.

And yet, according to ProPublica, Crow paid Martin's tuition in multiple years, and included the boy in the luxe vacations he took Clarence and Ginni on every year.

As is their regular habit, the Thomases have dispatched attorney Mark Paoletta to protect their sacred honor. Paoletta defended Thomas during his confirmation when Anita Hill accused him of being pervy and gross. Paoletta represented Ginni Thomas in her testimony before the House January 6 Select Committee, during which she repeatedly had to be reminded that, in fact, she did communicate with members of the Trump administration about her election fraud delusions. And along the way, Paoletta found time for a stint as general counsel in Trump's Office of Management and Budget, where he greenlighted a delay in disbursing congressionally allocated funds to Ukraine until President Zelenskyy agreed to "do us a favor though."

So, keep that in mind when you read this statement in which Paoletta extolls the Thomases' "remarkably generous efforts to help a child in need" and decries journalists who show so little respect for "the privacy of this young man and his family."

Harlan Crow’s tuition payments made directly to these schools on behalf of Justice Thomas’s great nephew did not constitute a reportable gift. Justice Thomas was not required to disclose the tuition payments made directly to Randolph Macon and the Georgia school on behalf of his great nephew because the definition of a “dependent child” under the Ethics in Government Act (5 U.S.C. 13101 (2)) does not include a “great nephew.” It is limited to a “son, daughter, stepson or stepdaughter.” Justice Thomas never asked Harlan Crow to pay for his great nephew’s tuition. And neither Harlan Crow, nor his company, had any business before the Supreme Court.

And, to be fair, he is probably technically correct. The law requires disclosure of gifts to "any individual who is a son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughterand... is a dependent of such reporting individual within the meaning of section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986." [Emphasis added.] And while Thomas was the boy's legal guardian and may have claimed him as a dependent, Martin was not legally his son or stepson. That's slicing it pretty fine, though, and clearly runs counter to the spirit of the law, if not the letter. It also characterizes the Thomases as Martin's benefactors, which is ... let's say icky.

There's also the unfortunate fact that Thomas did disclose a gift of $5,000 for Martin’s education in 2002 from a different friend, which would rather suggest that he understood he had an obligation to disclose before he un-understood it.

Similarly, Crow may not have been a plaintiff or defendant at the Supreme Court, so it is perhaps technically correct to say he had no business there, but he has invested millions of dollars in conservative causes and judicial confirmations. To pretend he's just Clarence's old pal is grossly disingenuous.

But gross is kinda par for the course with these people. And since the GOP lacks the will to enforce even minimum ethics standards, we're probably stuck with him. The best you can do is call it out and deprive them of the mantle of legitimacy as they systematically gut two generations worth of civil rights laws and undermine the ability of the executive branch to pass regulations when a Democrat occupies the White House.

Have we mentioned that Biden should pack the goddamn Court if and when he gets the chance? Because he absolutely, positively should.

[ ProPublica ]

Catch Liz Dye on Opening Arguments podcast.

Click the widget to keep your Wonkette ad-free and feisty. And if you're ordering from Amazon, use this link, because reasons .