![]() ![]() The justice’s explanation of an earlier nondisclosure was even less plausible. Opinion: The Clarence Thomas revelations are the last straw. “Early in my tenure at the Court,” he wrote, “I sought guidance from my colleagues … and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable.”Īssociate US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas poses for the official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on October 7, 2022. ![]() Unfortunately, that was not the first time Thomas attempted to justify nondisclosure with a dubious interpretation of the law.įollowing ProPublica’s initial report last month on Thomas’s decades of lavish vacations at Crow’s expense, the justice released a cryptic statement via the Supreme Court. It is indeed admirable that the Thomases, as Paoletta put it, “devoted twelve years of their lives to helping a beloved child in desperate need of love, support, and guidance,” while encountering “immeasurable personal and financial sacrifices.” But there’s no question Crow’s largesse financially benefited Thomas by saving him, as a legal guardian, from making hefty tuition payments on his own. Is there any doubt that most parents would consider it a wonderful gift for their dependent child to be provided an expensive education beyond their own means? A few years earlier, Thomas himself disclosed a different donor’s $5,000 “ education gift” for the same child. I have never heard of adolescents who pay their own tuition, and the boarding school arrangements were made with Thomas’ participation and approval, according to Paoletta’s statement. Paoletta does not acknowledge the inconvenient truth that the payments were reportable gifts to Thomas himself. Opinion: The only way to get to the truth of the Clarence Thomas scandal (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images) Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images The Senate confirmed Barrett's nomination to the Supreme Court today by a vote of 52-48. Supreme Court Associate Justice on the South Lawn of the White House Octoin Washington, DC. WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 26: Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas attends the ceremonial swearing-in ceremony for Amy Coney Barrett to be the U.S. It is limited to a “son, daughter, stepson or stepdaughter.” “The definition of a ‘dependent child’ under the Ethics in Government Act … does not include a ‘great nephew’” or ward, he explained. Although gifts to a justice’s minor children must ordinarily be disclosed, Paoletta found an escape route. The payments were excludable from reporting, Paoletta said, because they were gifts to the student rather than the Thomases. The gifts were not included on Thomas’s annual disclosure reports, according to ProPublica. ![]() The money was paid directly to the schools at Crow’s suggestion since Thomas and his wife were “struggling to find a school where they could send their great nephew,” according to Paoletta, a lawyer who has represented Virginia Thomas. In the case of the private school tuition, Thomas’ close friend Mark Paoletta released a statement on Thursday acknowledging Crow’s generous payments for the justice’s greatnephew at two schools for at least the 2006-08 school years, which may have totaled over $100,000 by the calculations of ProPublica based on the publicly available tuition rates. It beggars belief that he could repeatedly misinterpret plain statutory requirements and simple instructions on his annual disclosure reports. As a Supreme Court justice, Thomas routinely interprets complex statutes that affect millions of Americans, priding himself on close adherence to the text. The discovery is just the latest to cast a pall on Thomas for providing flimsy excuses for failing to make disclosures on these reports. Steven Lubet Randy Belice/Northwestern Law ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |