According to one of his ex-girlfriends, Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas has a "fantasy [package]," is "easily aroused," and had "a strong interest in pornography." All of this is 100 percent legal and 110 percent really gross! What else is Justice Thomas doing that is also 100 percent legal? Oh, puffing on cigars, flying on private jets, hanging out on 161-foot yachts...and getting enshrined in a museum dedicated to his childhood?
The Times details how a "friend" of Thomas, Texas real estate baron Harlan Crow, bought up the Pin Point seafood cannery that Thomas's mother used to work at, and is spending millions on "the restoration of the cannery, featuring a museum about the culture and history of Pin Point that has become a pet project" for the justice. Thomas's storied upbringing has been lauded by some as the epitome of the American Dream, and as everyone knows, the American Dream involves expensive dinners and a $15,000 bust of Abraham Lincoln, all gifts to Justice Thomas from Crow. "There would be guys puffing on cigars," said a singer who performed at several events that Thomas attended, "Clarence just kind of melted in with everyone else. We got introduced at dinner. He sat at Harlan's table."
Though Supreme Court justices are not bound by the code of conduct for federal judges (yeah, uh, this makes sense) that states that they "should not personally participate" in raising money for charity, the justices themselves say that they adhere to it. This code is in place to ensure that people don't feel compelled to donate to a cause that a Supreme Court justice is advocating. One legal ethics professor says, "I don't think I could say it's unethical. It's just a very peculiar situation." Peculiar, fucked up; tomato, tomahto.
Whether or not Thomas violated the code may depend of how the idea for the charity and museum took place. A retired judge says that it's important to ask, "Who brought up the idea? How willing was Mr. Crow to do it? What exact questions were asked by the Justice?" What is clear is that, as one attorney puts it, "If any other federal judge was doing it, he could face disciplinary action." Aw, c'mon, it's not like his wife is a lobbyist or anything.
