Clarence Thomas, Harlan Crow And The Original Meaning Of Corruption

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ relationship with conservative billionaire Harlan Crow is corrupt.

No, there’s no evidence yet Thomas changed his views to fit what his benefactor wants, at least not yet. There is, however, no need to require a quid pro quo to prove corruption under Thomas’ favorite form of legal interpretation: originalism.

“Words have meaning at the time they are written. When we read something that someone else has written, we give the words and phrases used by that person natural meaning in context,” Thomas said at . “Interest groups have turned the judicial appointments process into merely another theatre of operations for their unending battles. By making examples of nominees with whom they disagree, interest groups can seek to pressure potential or future nominees to adhere to certain positions and eschew others.”

Thomas’ speech focused on the then-recent adoption of liberal policies by the American Bar Association. Conservatives rejected the ABA’s role in the judicial nomination process ― it rates judges as qualified or not qualified ― in the 1980s. At the same time, conservatives founded the Federalist Society to act as a recruiter, trainer and filter for conservative judicial views in opposition to the ABA.

“Rather than worry about whether judges, secure in lifetime appointments and irreducible salaries, are the subject of too much popular criticism, the bar should seek to do its best to de-politicize the selection and nomination process of judges,” Thomas said. “We should not allow interest groups to undermine the very neutrality that is at the real heart of what it means to be a judge. Only by standing up to these pressures can we all really defend judicial independence.”

The Federalist Society came in for praise from Thomas for its “wall of separation between law and politics.”

That wall of separation may have been conceivable in 1999, but such comments are risible in 2023. Leo, the Federalist Society executive and today the co-chairman of its board of directors, helped shepherd the nominations of Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito in 2005. He worked with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to block President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. Then he went to work for President Donald Trump to help him select Supreme Court justices and get them through the Senate.

Throughout all of this, Leo and Crow, and the activist groups tied to them, lavished Thomas with money and praise. What they have done is the flip side of Thomas’ worries about the politicization of the nomination process through negative attacks. They have rewarded him with gifts, family support, employment for his wife and the luxury life of a billionaire. This, too, is a threat to judicial independence and a fount of the original meaning of corruption.